District U-46 buys cyber liability insurance, considers AI tech for teachers
The $118,283 insurance policy with Tokio Marine HCC would run from July 1 through June 30, 2026, and comes with a $3 million limit and a $100,000 deductible, according to documents provided for the meeting.
'U-46's decision to purchase a cybersecurity insurance policy was driven by the growing frequency and sophistication of cyber threats targeting school districts nationwide,' Deputy Superintendent of Instruction Lela Majstorovic said prior to the meeting.
It's become necessary, Majstorovic said, because as student and staff data systems become more interconnected, the potential financial and operational risks from a cyber incident have increased significantly.
Meeting documents said that 'since 2023, 108 ransomware attacks have impacted over 1,800 schools nationwide. … According to Alliant Insurance Services, the district's insurance broker, the average ransom demand in 2024 was approximately $847,000.'
'While the district has very strong, state of the art preventive measures in place,' Majstorovic said, 'insurance offers added reassurance in managing unforeseen events. Purchasing a cybersecurity insurance policy adds a critical layer of financial protection and support in the event of an attack.'
At Monday's meeting, Majstorovic and Rola Tarek Mohamed, a research and project management fellow, also continued a board discussion about whether to spend $432,000 for 4,000 educator ChatGPT Edu licenses with Open AI for the 2025-26 school year.
The system will allow educators 'to use AI as a planning assistant, research partner and support tool,' Mohamed said at the meeting. The deal would include staff training on how to use the technology.
ChatGPT Edu could allow users to write an email that ensures 'it's appropriate to the intended audience,' upload curriculum frameworks to create specific tasks, and check that lesson plans align with board-adopted curriculum, among other things, Majstorovic said.
'Any teacher is expected to do this level of planning on an every-single-day basis,' she said. 'Using a tool like this could really help with navigating that planning.'
Time currently be used for such work can free teachers up to do other things, such as thinking about how they are giving kids that 'in-the-moment feedback so that they can continue to learn,' Majstorovic said.
Mohamed told the board that related AI guidelines prohibit sharing any personal data or using it for grading.
Board member Dawn Martin said she wasn't convinced the technology would be completely beneficial.
'I have a lot of concerns with this, the ethics, the integrity behind AI, the ability of it to take away critical thought, especially if we start rolling it out for students,' she said. 'Just because something exists doesn't mean embracing it is fully the way (to go).'
U-46 Superintendent Suzanne Johnson said, 'I think we find ourselves in this really interesting place where we have to start to determine what are the guardrails that we can identify and create, how do we support professional learning, how do we start to do some of that — if it's sooner than later — as it's preparation for this thing that now exists.'
Any proposal won't be back for discussion for at least five weeks, Johnson said, so there's time for more board input and feedback.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Future Forecasting An S-Curve Pathway That Advances AI To Become AGI By 2040
Identifying the S-curve pathway from current AI to the attainment of AGI. In today's column, I am continuing my special series covering the anticipated pathways that will get us from conventional AI to the eagerly sought attainment of AGI (artificial general intelligence). Here, I undertake an analytically speculative deep dive into the detailed aspects of a distinctive S-curve route. I've previously outlined that there are seven major paths for advancing AI to reach AGI (see the link here) -- the S-curve avenue posits that we will have a period of AI advancement that hits a plateau, and then after residing in this stagnating plateau for a while, new advancements will ramp up again and bring us to AGI. Let's talk about it. This analysis of an innovative AI breakthrough is part of my ongoing Forbes column coverage on the latest in AI, including identifying and explaining various impactful AI complexities (see the link here). For those readers who have been following along on my special series about AGI pathways, please note that I provide similar background aspects at the start of this piece as I did previously, setting the stage for new readers. Heading Toward AGI And ASI First, some fundamentals are required to set the stage for this weighty discussion. There is a great deal of research going on to further advance AI. The general goal is to either reach artificial general intelligence (AGI) or maybe even the outstretched possibility of achieving artificial superintelligence (ASI). AGI is AI that is considered on par with human intellect and can seemingly match our intelligence. ASI is AI that has gone beyond human intellect and would be superior in many if not all feasible ways. The idea is that ASI would be able to run circles around humans by outthinking us at every turn. For more details on the nature of conventional AI versus AGI and ASI, see my analysis at the link here. We have not yet attained AGI. In fact, it is unknown as to whether we will reach AGI, or that maybe AGI will be achievable in decades or perhaps centuries from now. The AGI attainment dates that are floating around are wildly varying and wildly unsubstantiated by any credible evidence or ironclad logic. ASI is even more beyond the pale when it comes to where we are currently with conventional AI. AI Experts Consensus On AGI Date Right now, efforts to forecast when AGI is going to be attained consist principally of two paths. First, there are highly vocal AI luminaires making individualized brazen predictions. Their headiness makes outsized media headlines. Those prophecies seem to be coalescing toward the year 2030 as a targeted date for AGI. A somewhat quieter path is the advent of periodic surveys or polls of AI experts. This wisdom of the crowd approach is a form of scientific consensus. As I discuss at the link here, the latest polls seem to suggest that AI experts generally believe that we will reach AGI by the year 2040. Should you be swayed by the AI luminaries or more so by the AI experts and their scientific consensus? Historically, the use of scientific consensus as a method of understanding scientific postures has been relatively popular and construed as the standard way of doing things. If you rely on an individual scientist, they might have their own quirky view of the matter. The beauty of consensus is that a majority or more of those in a given realm are putting their collective weight behind whatever position is being espoused. The old adage is that two heads are better than one. In the case of scientific consensus, it might be dozens, hundreds, or thousands of heads that are better than one. For this discussion on the various pathways to AGI, I am going to proceed with the year 2040 as the consensus anticipated target date. Besides the scientific consensus of AI experts, another newer and more expansive approach to gauging when AGI will be achieved is known as AGI convergence-of-evidence or AGI consilience, which I discuss at the link here. Seven Major Pathways As mentioned, in a previous posting I identified seven major pathways that AI is going to advance to become AGI (see the link here). Here's my list of all seven major pathways getting us from contemporary AI to the treasured AGI: You can apply those seven possible pathways to whatever AGI timeline that you want to come up with. Futures Forecasting Let's undertake a handy divide-and-conquer approach to identify what must presumably happen to get from current AI to AGI. We are living in 2025 and somehow are supposed to arrive at AGI by the year 2040. That's essentially 15 years of elapsed time. The idea is to map out the next fifteen years and speculate what will happen with AI during that journey. This can be done in a forward-looking mode and also a backward-looking mode. The forward-looking entails thinking about the progress of AI on a year-by-year basis, starting now and culminating in arriving at AGI in 2040. The backward-looking mode involves starting with 2040 as the deadline for AGI and then working back from that achievement on a year-by-year basis to arrive at the year 2025 (matching AI presently). This combination of forward and backward envisioning is a typical hallmark of futurecasting. Is this kind of a forecast of the future ironclad? Nope. If anyone could precisely lay out the next fifteen years of what will happen in AI, they probably would be as clairvoyant as Warren Buffett when it comes to predicting the stock market. Such a person could easily be awarded a Nobel Prize and ought to be one of the richest people ever. All in all, this strawman that I show here is primarily meant to get the juices flowing on how we can be future forecasting the state of AI. It is a conjecture. It is speculative. But at least it has a reasonable basis and is not entirely arbitrary or totally artificial. I went ahead and used the fifteen years of reaching AGI in 2040 as an illustrative example. It could be that 2050 is the date for AGI instead, and thus this journey will play out over 25 years. The timeline and mapping would then have 25 years to deal with rather than fifteen. If 2030 is going to be the AGI arrival year, the pathway would need to be markedly compressed. AGI S-Curve Path From 2025 To 2040 The S-curve is distinctive since it consists of an S-shape such that the pathway initially has notable progress, hits an extended plateau and not much is advancing, and then proceeds to get underway again with a bit of a flourish on the tail-end. This is in stark contrast to a linear pathway. In a linear pathway, the progression of AI toward AGI is relatively equal each year and consists of a gradual incremental climb from conventional AI to AGI. I laid out the details of the linear path in a prior posting, see the link here. For ease of discussion about the S-curve pathway, let's assume that over the fifteen years, the first phase of the S-curve will be five years long, the plateau will be five years in length, and the tail-end will be five years too. This doesn't have to be the case and the length for each phase could differ. For example, maybe the upfront phase is three years, the plateau is eight years, and the final phase is four years. Using five years per phase is well illustrative and sufficient for this analysis. The S-curve phases will be conveniently depicted this way: There is an overlapping at the boundary years of 2030 and 2035. Also, for this depiction, I'll lump the individual years into the three noted phases. Here then is a strawman futures forecast roadmap from 2025 to 2040 of an S-curve pathway getting us to AGI: Years 2025-2030 (First phase of S-curve): Years 2030-2035 (Second phase of S-curve, the plateau): Years 2035-2040 (Third phase of S-curve, resumption): Contemplating The Timeline I'd ask you to contemplate the strawman S-curve timeline and consider where you will be and what you will be doing during each of those three phases and fifteen years. As per the famous words of Mark Twain: 'The future interests me -- I'm going to spend the rest of my life there.' You have an opportunity to actively participate in where AI is heading and help in shaping how AGI will be utilized. AGI, if attained, will change the world immensely and you can play an important part in how this happens.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
DA Davidson Reaffirms Buy on Adobe (ADBE) After Figma's S-1 Filing
Adobe Inc. (NASDAQ:ADBE) is one of the 13 Best Large Cap Stocks to Buy Right Now. On July 2, DA Davidson maintained its 'Buy' rating on Adobe Inc. (NASDAQ:ADBE) with a price target of $500. This decision came after Figma filed its S-1 for an IPO. The research firm pointed out that Figma shows financial strength with $821 million in revenue over the last twelve months, showing a 48% year-over-year growth as of Q1 2025. Figma also posted 18% non-GAAP operating margins. A team of engineers and scientists collaborating at a workstation surrounded by their applications and solutions. DA Davidson sees Figma's success as proof of its goal to make design easier and more accessible through collaborative tools that help both individuals and teams by reducing technical barriers. The research firm noted that Figma and Adobe Inc. (NASDAQ:ADBE) are well-positioned to benefit as artificial intelligence accelerates the output of digital products. According to the research note, the $500 price target for Adobe Inc. (NASDAQ:ADBE) represents 22 times the company's expected earnings per share for fiscal year 2026. Adobe Inc. (NASDAQ:ADBE) is a global leader in digital media and digital marketing solutions that offer creator tools and services to individuals, teams, and enterprises to create, publish, and promote content. While we acknowledge the potential of ADBE as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 10 Best American Semiconductor Stocks to Buy Now and 11 Best Fintech Stocks to Buy Right Now. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
AI helped save the chip industry. What happens if it turns out to be a bust?
Nvidia is now the first company to surge past $4 trillion in market capitalization, rebounding from its DeepSeek-induced slump earlier this year. Other AI chipmakers, including AMD and China's Huawei, are reporting strong financial results. Nearly every major chipmaker is now centering its strategy on AI. But what if AI doesn't work out? This isn't just a hypothetical question. Some signs suggest that AI growth is stalling, or at least slowing down. New models no longer show significant improvements from scaling up size or the amount of training data. Nobel laureate Demis Hassabis recently noted that 'we are no longer getting the same progress' on AI development. Andreessen Horowitz, one of the most prominent investors in AI, similarly shared concerns that AI model capabilities appeared to be plateauing. One reason for AI's slowing performance might be that models have already consumed most available digital data, leaving little left over for further improvement. Developers are instead turning to synthetic data, but it might be less effective—and might even make models worse. AI development is also enormously capital intensive. Training the most advanced models requires compute clusters costing billions of dollars. Even a single training run can cost tens of millions of dollars. Yet while development costs keep going up, monetary rewards are limited. Aside from AI coding assistants, there are few examples of AI generating returns that justify these immense capital investments. Some companies are already scaling back their AI infrastructure investment due to cost. Microsoft, for example, is 'slowing or pausing some early-stage projects' and has canceled equipment orders for several global data center projects. Meta, AWS and Google have all reportedly cut their GPU orders. Chip bottlenecks, power shortages, and public concerns are also barriers to mass AI adoption. If the AI boom peters out, that's bad news for the chip industry, which has used this new technology to avoid a serious slump. Chips are getting more expensive to make. Developing new manufacturing processes cost billions of dollars; building new plants can cost tens of billions of dollars. These costs are all passed onto consumers but, outside of AI, customers aren't keen on buying more expensive chips. The fancy technologies in today's AI processors aren't that useful for other purposes. AI delayed an industry reckoning: Manufacturing is getting more expensive, while performance gains are shrinking. The economic promise of AI justifies high chip prices, but if that goes away, the chip industry needs to find something else to persuade people to sustain investment in advanced chip manufacturing. Otherwise, advanced chipmaking will become unsustainable: New technologies will cost more and more, while delivering less and less. A chip industry slump will upend several geopolitical and economic objectives. Governments have poured billions of dollars into building domestic chip industries. U.S. President Donald Trump routinely threatens to use tariffs to bring semiconductor manufacturing back home. The U.S.'s supposed lead on chip development may prove to be a mirage, particularly as China dominates legacy chip production. And an AI reversal would shake up the world's tech sector, forcing Big Tech to rethink its bets. Given these stakes, policymakers need to encourage further innovation in AI by facilitating easier access to data, chips, power, and cooling. This includes pragmatic policies on copyright and data protection, a balanced approach to onshore and offshore chip manufacturing, and removing regulatory barriers to energy use and generation. Governments shouldn't necessarily apply the precautionary principle to AI; the benefits are too great to handicap its development, at least at these early stages. Nor should large-scale AI applications, such as autonomous vehicles or home robotics, face unreasonably high requirements for implementation. Investors should also explore alternate AI approaches that don't require as much data and infrastructure, potentially unlocking new AI growth. The industry must also explore non-AI applications for chips, if only to manage their risk. To ensure the chip industry can survive a slowdown, it must reduce the cost of advanced chipmaking. Companies should work together on research and development, as well as working with universities, to lower development costs. More investment is needed in chiplets, advanced packaging, and reconfigurable hardware. The industry must support interoperable standards, open-source tools, and agile hardware development. Shared, subsidized infrastructure for design and fabrication can help smaller companies finalize ideas before manufacturing. But, importantly, the drive to onshore manufacturing may be counterproductive: Doing so carelessly will significantly increase chip costs. The future of chips and AI are now deeply intertwined. If chips are to thrive, AI must grow. If not, the entire chip sector may now be in jeopardy. The opinions expressed in commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune. This story was originally featured on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
