The problem Kort solves

Slow and Expensive Alternative Dispute Resolution.
The world is experiencing an accelerated pace of globalization and digitalization. An exponentially growing number of transactions are being conducted online between people across jurisdictional boundaries.
If the blockchain promise comes to a reality, in a not-so-distant future, most goods, labor and capital will be allocated through decentralized global platforms.
Disputes will certainly arise. Users of decentralized eBay will claim that sellers failed to send the goods as specified in the agreement, guests in decentralized Airbnb will claim that the rented house was not “as shown in the pictures” and backers in a crowdfunding platform will claim a refund as teams fail to deliver the promised results.
Smart contracts are smart enough to automatically execute as programmed, but not to render subjective judgments or to include elements from outside the blockchain. Existing dispute resolution technologies are too slow, too expensive and too unreliable for a decentralized global economy operating in real time. A fast, inexpensive, transparent, reliable and decentralized dispute resolution mechanism that renders ultimate judgments about the enforceability of smart contracts is a key institution for the blockchain era.
Kort is a decentralized dispute resolution platform that uses crowdsourcing, blockchain and game theory to develop a justice system that produces true decisions in a secure and inexpensive way.

Features offered by Kort:
• Creation and Resolution of Disputes.
• Ready Made Integration in
• Real World Arbitration.
• Trust-less, Permissionless and Decentralized jury selection.
• Incentivizing accurate decisions and disincentivizing inexact ones.
• Feedback for products and creators.
Understand KORT with help of a flowchart (https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmYLR7AyfVa5K1diQvrDbyX9pEe3SJpxhUQFnTDsLkzqKZ)
If Lighthouse link doesnt work (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p_Md_ooLtK4cgM3n9YnXBULYOObu5k-f/view?usp=sharing)

Challenges we ran into

Enforcement
For ADR clauses to be enforceable, they must be inclusive of the necessary information. Whether the clause mandates some form of self-guided negotiation, mediation or arbitration, it needs to clearly state certain terms. For example, an ADR clause may require notification that a dispute has arisen. It is possible that one party believes there is a conflict, while the other party sees no problem at all, which is why these clauses often require the dissatisfied party to provide timely notification about their concerns and intention to seek ADR. The clause should also identify which method of ADR will be used and may even specify that an ADR association or organization is used for the proceedings. This may, for example, be applicable to contracts involving complex business issues, where an ADR expert with subject matter expertise is appropriate.

Clauses also commonly establish whether participants will be bound by the outcome of the ADR proceeding. Arbitration clauses typically include an agreement to be bound in to avoid litigation down the line. While mediation clauses cannot force participants to reach an agreement, they can mandate that the parties participate in good faith and be bound by any consensual resolution reached through mediation.

Internet
The internet was actually ineffective at the ETH India conference moreover because of the huge audience the mobile network was not working properly. We had to work in shifts wait long hours to push a simple code or to even download a simple jpeg.
It gave an unreal and unfair advantage to people who had already created or had started working on the project before coming to the conference.