With thanks to Paul Fain for this resource,
and who also mentioned the First Rung Observatory.

 

Google researchers are fighting the company to tell the world what they know about AI — from washingtonpost.com by Gerrit De Vynck
Employment contracts deter staff from warning the public about AI risks, current workers said.

Workers inside Google’s artificial intelligence division are pushing executives to release them from non-disparagement agreements, arguing that they must be free to inform the public about the risks of the technology they are working to advance, according to people inside the company.
…
The non-disparagement agreements signed by employees in Britain block them from communicating with the public about the potential impacts of AI, the two current Google workers said. While company officials are now saying that they will not go after former employees who speak out, some staffers are pushing for updated language in existing contracts to provide them with legal certainty.

 

Are We Sending Young People False Signals About Their Futures? — from workshift.org by Emily M. Dickens and Elissa Salas

For years, we’ve told young people that training + credentials = opportunity. And for many pathways, that’s still true. But an AI-disrupted labor market is forcing us to be uncomfortably honest about what has always been a much more complicated equation.

Mixed Signals
Today’s young people need us to be able to say that we don’t fully know what the future of work looks like. Mixed signals abound. For example, at major tech companies, new graduate and entry-level hiring is down roughly 65% compared to 2019 pre-pandemic levels. So far in 2026, AI has been cited in more than 120K announced job cuts.

On the other hand, major companies including Google and CSX announced plans to hire to meet growth goals. Some of the fastest-growing occupations range across healthcare, skilled trades, and tech. In September, Business Roundtable’s CEO Economic Outlook Index showed a seven-point increase in hiring plans. The messages sent to young people are genuinely contradictory, and we need to help them cut through the noise.

Helping young people develop in this way will require smarter, stronger bridges between the systems that shape our workforce, such as better connecting K-12 classrooms to career pathways, aligning higher education institutions with the evolving job market, and ensuring untapped talent has access to in-demand employment opportunities. 

 

We’re Waiting Too Long to Talk to Kids About Their Futures (Julie Lammers, Britebound) — from thehumanist.xyz by Julie Lammers and Allison Dulin Salisbury
“By eighth grade, kids are already ruling out careers they’ve never had a chance to explore.”

Per Allison:

Julie Lammers, who leads Britebound, makes a compelling case for starting career exploration in middle school for precisely this reason. The goal isn’t to get a 12-year-old to choose a profession, but to help them discover possibilities they might otherwise never consider, while they’re still forming their sense of who they are and what they’re capable of.

I love the implication of this argument. If we care about preserving choice, we should start career exploration earlier, not later. Done well, it could be one of the most powerful ways to expand opportunity for young people whose circumstances might otherwise define the limits of their ambition.

Julie and I talked about what this looks like in practice, why career navigation should be a skill we develop rather than only a service we deliver, and what young people themselves are telling Britebound about the support they want. It’s a conversation that challenged some of my assumptions about when and how we should prepare kids for their futures.


Also from Allison, check out:


[Special Report] AI Could Radically Accelerate How We Learn About Learning — from thehumanist.xyz by Allison Dulin Salisbury and Mandy McLean
AI is making a virtual laboratory for human learning possible, opening the door to testing ideas we could never afford or safely attempt with actual students.

Recent advances in AI raise the possibility of building something education has never really had: a virtual laboratory for learning.

At the center of this possibility are synthetic students—AI models designed to simulate aspects of how real students behave and, eventually, how they learn. Researchers could test hundreds of ways to teach a concept, give feedback, or sequence a curriculum and identify the most promising approaches for different kinds of learners. Developers could try out a new assessment or AI tutor on thousands of simulated students before putting it in front of real ones. Districts could stress-test AI products for safety and begin to understand which tools might work for whom and under what circumstances.

True, this could make running education studies faster and cheaper. But change the cost of experimentation enough and you change what gets experimented on. The promise of synthetic students is that researchers could ask more questions, test more ambitious ideas, explore edge cases, and discard failures before spending years and millions of dollars studying them with actual students.

 
 

New study: 15 community college presidents on what it will take to lead higher ed’s next chapter — from eddesignlab.org

Community colleges are at a pivotal moment.

As learners, employers, and regional economies change, these institutions have an opportunity to lead the next evolution of higher education — if they can move beyond structures built for a different era.

In the Lab’s new study, Insights from 15 Community College Presidents on the Future of Learning in a New Economy, leaders share their perspectives on the opportunities and barriers facing the sector, as well as the institutional changes needed to help more learners access economic mobility.

Their insights validate Education Design Lab’s Future of Learning framework, which asks five essential design questions:

  1. How might we make skills and competencies visible?
  2. How might we create stackable pathways that credential skills along the way?
  3. How might we make learning universally flexible through multiple modalities?
  4. How might we guarantee applied learning opportunities for every learner?
  5. How might we ensure every learner has access to adequate support services?

 

 

Dario Amodei’s article here:
We Must Pace the Frontier — from darioamodei.com

But like many technologies before it, AI brings risks, and because it is such a powerful technology, these risks are serious. I’ve written a lot about them too. They include the risk of losing control of AI systems, misuse of AI for cyberattacks and bioterrorism, and serious economic disruption. A race to the bottom, spurred by commercial incentives, can make these risks more acute.

Along with my co-founders and employees, I have grappled with this duality of risk and benefit since the beginning of Anthropic.


Also relevant/see:


[GIFTED ARTICLE]
Anthropic CEO calls for the AI industry to slow down — from washingtonpost.com by Ted Hesson, Ian Duncan, and Gerrit De Vynck
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said he was worried about the ability to control self-improving AI models.

Three of the nation’s leading artificial intelligence executives endorsed slowing down the blistering pace of technological advancement, revealing the growing unease with its potential dangers at the industry’s very highest levels.

The call was first made in an essay Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei posted online Saturday. The idea has gained ground in recent weeks as AI companies have struggled in some cases to keep their creations under control, even as they usher in an age in which AI systems themselves can build the more powerful next generation of the technology.


[GIFTED ARTICLE]
For years, they warned AI could kill all humans. Now people are listening. — from washingtonpost.com by Nitasha Tiku
A doomsaying community once on the periphery of the tech industry has gained influence, as AI “agents” perform amazing and alarming feats.

But when Hubinger issued a similar warning this week in a post on X, his message was viewed tens of millions of times, prompting state and federal lawmakers to echo his concern. Now he spoke as a team lead at Anthropic, developer of the chatbot Claude and a company set to go public at a valuation of over $1 trillion.

“AI could kill all humans … I personally think it is >10% within the next decade,” Hubinger wrote, in response to the resignation of his colleague Jacob Coxon, who accused Anthropic of racing ahead despite the dangers.
.

 
 

We are at a tipping point. In the next 25 years, technologies like AI, clean energy, and bioengineering are poised to reshape society on a scale few can imagine.

Peter Leyden draws on decades of observing technological revolutions and historical patterns to show how old systems collapse, new ones rise, and humanity faces both extraordinary risk and unprecedented opportunity.

0:00 We’re on the cusp of an era of progress
0:37 The Great Progression
1:08 What was the ‘Long Boom?’
4:56 How often do these epoch resets happen?
6:12 3 Tipping points
6:39 Artificial Intelligence
7:13 Clean energy technologies
7:32 Biotechnology
9:00 The 80-year cycle
13:27 The Gilded Age
17:50 The Founding Era
22:46 The new enlightenment
32:18 The clean energy revolution
37:13 Bioengineering the genome
39:43 Industrial production vs biological engineering
47:40 What will the future think?

 

Student Voices: Technology as a Future Learning Partner — from campustechnology.com by Mary Grush
A Q&A with Eli Blouin and Mark Frydenberg

Key Takeaways

  • With advanced technologies, we’re moving from accessing learning resources to participating in technology learning partnerships.
  • Technology learning partners participate in the learning process by asking questions and giving feedback, not just information search results.
  • Tomorrow’s technology learning partners will understand the whole learner — including knowledge gaps and personal learning style.
  • Student experiences with AI and other technologies today will inform the next generation of human/machine learning partners.

Grush: What do you think may be among the most meaningful changes in, say, the next five years? 

Blouin: When I think of what will improve in the next five years — and I truly believe it’s where we’re ultimately heading — I think it will be the technology learning partner’s ability to gain a full picture of the learner. The technology will be able to take absurd amounts of context — and data — and understand the learner as a whole: where their gaps are, what they need to learn, how they learn, and how to create content tailored to a particular student. In an instant it would be able to assess, to test knowledge, and know the student as a whole person. That would be an ideal learning partner.

 

From the LegalTech Fund’s Q2 2026 Update:

Industry Foresight: Following the successful completion of Pathways Phase 1, we launched Pathways Phase 2: The Future of Law in partnership with Harvey and Law.com. Phase 2 brings together a curated cohort of legal industry leaders, innovators, academics, and operators to develop future scenarios and identify the critical legal, regulatory, business, capital, and technology inflection points that may shape the industry through 2040. The resulting framework will serve as a shared strategic tool to help the legal ecosystem navigate uncertainty and prepare for multiple possible futures.


 

The 2031 Crisis in Higher Education: a stark scenario — from bryanalexander.org by Bryan Alexander — with commentary on a posting by Matthew F. Wilson, Ph.D.

Today’s post is about a scenario for higher ed’s future.  It’s not from me, but created by one Matthew F. Wilson, director of Research Translation and AI Strategy at Baylor’s Institute for Global Human Flourishing.  “The 2031 Crisis in Higher Education” is a dark one, imagining an accelerating decline for American colleges and universities.
…
One key assumption of this scenario is that most colleges and universities will be unable to redesign themselves for the changing time.
…
All of that said, it’s a fascinating and daunting scenario.  It’s an interesting vision of my post-peak higher ed world.

A graphic from Matthew Wilson:


From DSC:
From what I can tell and have read, the things in the above graphic are already happening — and have been happening for some time now.

Also, I don’t think traditional institutions of higher education have the culture(s) it takes to change. So that part about colleges and U’s not being able to redesign themselves for the changing times could easily turn out to be the case.

 

Will this new company be the largest company on the Internet by 2030? [Christian]

From DSC:
The vision that I’ve been tracking for well over a decade begins with this graphic:
.


Could LearnVector be this next-generation company/platform? Perhaps. Time will tell.


Per Matt Tower via The EdSheet Vol. 38 dated 7/31/26:

  • Coursera bets $100M on its own co-founder: Andrew Ng’s new venture LearnVector lands one of the largest single checks in edtech this year — from Coursera, the company he founded 14 years ago.
    .


LearnVector.ai

 

From DSC:
Below is an item on futures thinking. Don’t blow this off. This topic — and skill/strategy — is important not only to traditional institutions of higher education, but also to businesses and organizations of all sizes. In fact, even students can practice developing a list of potential scenarios and implement their plans of action if one of those scenarios occurs.


Chris Mayer’s posting on LinkedIn.com

 

Steward Stories: How Heart of Oregon Corps Turns Service into Careers — from gettingsmart.com by Karen Pittman and Merita Irby

Our “Steward Stories” series captures lessons learned from interviews with leaders of mature, purpose-built ecosystem intermediaries. An ecosystem steward is a boundary-spanning leader who goes beyond traditional out-of-school time (OST) system building to weave together the diverse people, places, and possibilities that shape a young person’s daily life. Rather than managing a single isolated network, stewards collaborate across K-12 schools, youth development programs, and workforce systems to build vibrant, equitable learning ecosystems. They drive systemic change from practice to policy by creating purpose-built intermediaries, developing scalable cross-system training tools, and championing “Future Features” of learning. These core priorities include promoting learner agency, institutionalizing “unwalled” schools that connect community resources to formal education, broadening the definition of educators to include informal mentors, and normalizing pathways for students to receive school credit or credentials for out-of-school learning.

 The starting points, paths, and targets set by these stewards are as varied as the conditions and opportunities present within their communities. But they share similarities in vision and approach. Learn More Here.

Learning ecosystems may be found anywhere, but it takes careful stewardship to help them thrive.
— Shift, Remake Learning

 
© 2025 | Daniel Christian