.png)
When we conceived the Rebuild Challenge Hackathon 2025, we weren't asking participants to simply apply fresh paint to outdated interfaces. We were challenging them to fundamentally question what makes a digital experience "obsolete" and whether modern tools could resurrect what we'd written off as irreparable. The premise bordered on archaeological: dig up the web's forgotten interfaces and bring them back to life with contemporary engineering.
What emerged wasn't just a hackathon—it was a technical experiment in digital resurrection that pushed both our infrastructure and our participants to their limits.
Engineering Infrastructure for Digital Archaeology
Building infrastructure for the Rebuild Challenge required a fundamentally different approach than traditional hackathons. Instead of providing starter templates or boilerplate code, we created an environment that demanded critical thinking from the first keystroke. Teams had to identify genuinely broken digital experiences, analyze their fundamental pain points, and then architect solutions that honored the original intent while embracing modern capabilities.
Our technical foundation reflected this philosophy. We provided guidance for Progressive Web Apps, browser extensions, accessibility overlays, and mobile-first frontends, but deliberately avoided enforcing rigid tech stack requirements. The goal was transformation through understanding, not uniformity through compliance.
Real-time support flowed through Discord channels staffed by engineers, mentors, and community leaders who understood that rebuilding often requires deeper technical archaeology than building from scratch. A constellation of internal bots handled event timing, reminders, and submissions, ensuring that administrative friction never interrupted the creative flow.
The crown jewel of our infrastructure was the "Before/After Validator"—a system that allowed participants to submit screenshots and walkthroughs demonstrating their interface transformations. This gave our judges the ability to evaluate not just code quality or feature completeness, but the contextual impact of each rebuild. Understanding what was broken and how it was fixed became as important as the technical execution itself.
The Evaluation Architects
Our judging panel represented a deliberately curated blend of technical depth and systems thinking. Rather than assembling a large committee, we chose three judges whose expertise complemented each other perfectly, creating an evaluation framework that could assess projects from multiple critical angles.
Vladislav Krushenitskii, a Senior Front-End Developer with over a decade of interface engineering experience, brought laser focus to performance optimization and responsive design. His background in React.js and React Native made him particularly attentive to teams that demonstrated modular UI logic and micro-frontend architectures. As he observed during evaluation, "The best projects are the ones where the code feels as intentional as the design."
Anand Kumar Singh, a wireless and embedded systems architect currently at Meta, contributed systems-level perspective that proved crucial for evaluating projects beyond their surface polish. His background spanning FPGA programming to high-efficiency mesh networking meant he understood innovation at the infrastructure level. His philosophy resonated throughout the judging process: "If your project could still run with no cloud access, no internet, and still deliver value—now we're talking."
Yulia Drogunova, a Senior QA Engineer at Raiffeisen Bank, ensured that every project faced scrutiny not just for what it could do, but how reliably it did it. Her experience embedding automated tests into deployment pipelines and handling end-to-end scenarios across mobile and backend environments brought essential quality perspective. "When I see testable logic, clear flows, and thought-out UX feedback loops," she noted, "that's when I know it's real."
This trio created a judging framework that balanced technical innovation with practical sustainability, ensuring that winners demonstrated both ambitious vision and execution excellence.
Projects That Redefined Resurrection
The winning projects revealed the remarkable range of what "rebuilding" could mean when approached with both technical skill and creative courage.
BIOSage claimed first place by tackling perhaps the most audacious target imaginable: the BIOS interface itself. While most users never interact with firmware-level interfaces, the team recognized that this represented one of computing's most fundamentally outdated experiences. Their solution featured an interactive dashboard with real-time system monitoring and offline diagnostics powered by a locally hosted LLaMA model. The interface was multilingual and functioned without internet connectivity—transforming a typically cryptic, text-based experience into something genuinely usable. Judge Anand Kumar Singh's appreciation was immediate: "You took firmware-level tooling and made it intelligent. That's rare and deeply needed."
Refreshify, securing second place, offered a glimpse into the future of automated interface modernization. Users could paste any URL and instantly receive an AI-redesigned version that maintained the original's functionality while applying contemporary design principles. With real-time preview capabilities and accessibility considerations baked into the transformation process, it made the promise of intelligent web redesign feel tangible rather than theoretical.
Bettershire Hathaway demonstrated that sometimes the most profound innovation lies in clarity rather than complexity. The team chose Berkshire Hathaway's famously retro website—a digital artifact that seems frozen in the early web era—and rebuilt it into a clean, investor-friendly dashboard. Using modular React architecture and carefully preserving Warren Buffett's distinctive voice throughout the interface, they proved that respecting original intent could coexist with modern usability standards.
The breadth of other submissions revealed the creative potential unleashed by time constraints. Battle City Remastered offered a faithful Python-based recreation of the classic NES game, while ReStyle tackled Stack Overflow's interface challenges through a Chrome extension. Each project demonstrated different approaches to the central challenge: how do you honor the past while embracing the future?
Engineering Challenges in Digital Resurrection
The 72-hour time constraint created fascinating technical pressures that revealed both the complexity of rebuilding and the ingenuity of our participants. Unlike greenfield development, rebuilding requires understanding legacy systems, user expectations built over years of interaction, and the delicate balance between preservation and innovation.
We encountered edge cases that no amount of traditional testing could have anticipated. Malformed URLs crashed auto-validators in unexpected ways. CSS grid implementations revealed browser compatibility issues that had been dormant for years. Most memorably, the BIOS modification project triggered hardware-level access restrictions on a reviewer's machine, creating a debugging session that spanned both software and firmware domains.
Rather than forcing conformity through restrictive guidelines, we built responsive tooling that adapted to participant needs. UI scaffolding scripts helped teams accelerate initial setup. Prompt-based testing environments enabled rapid iteration on AI-powered features. Opt-in CI/CD pipelines with GitHub Actions supported teams that wanted to implement sophisticated deployment strategies within the time constraint.
These engineering challenges revealed a crucial insight: rebuilding is often more technically demanding than building from scratch because it requires understanding not just what should be built, but why the original failed and how those failure modes can be avoided while preserving valuable aspects of the original experience.
Lessons in Digital Renaissance
The Rebuild Challenge demonstrated that innovation doesn't require blank slates—it thrives under intelligent constraints. The most successful projects weren't those that completely discarded their source material, but those that demonstrated deep understanding of what made the original valuable while fearlessly addressing its limitations.
This approach revealed patterns applicable far beyond hackathon contexts. In an industry often obsessed with disruption through replacement, our participants proved that disruption through thoughtful evolution can be equally powerful. They showed that legacy systems aren't just technical debt to be eliminated, but archaeological sites containing valuable insights about user needs and interaction patterns.
As we plan future iterations, we're considering even more ambitious constraints. What if teams received only 24 hours but gained access to pre-built backend infrastructure? What if every project had to maintain backward compatibility with the original system? What if we assigned teams legacy applications that nobody wants to touch, forcing innovation through necessity rather than choice?
The fundamental lesson from the Rebuild Challenge extends beyond web development: sometimes the most inspiring work comes not from building something entirely new, but from daring to rebuild what others have declared beyond repair. In a world increasingly focused on replacement over renovation, our participants proved that resurrection can be its own form of revolution.
The web's forgotten interfaces aren't just historical curiosities—they're opportunities waiting for the right combination of technical skill and creative vision to bring them back to life.
