Artificial intelligence is fundamentally reshaping countless industries; education is no exception. As AI tools rapidly enter classrooms, there are concerns about fair access, effective implementation, and the risk of widening the still persistent digital divide. Who are the players best positioned to guide this transition in a way that truly benefits every student?
I recently spoke with Alix Guerrier, CEO of DonorsChoose, an education nonprofit where teachers submit funding requests based on classroom needs. Ninety percent of public schools in America have teachers using DonorsChoose, which tackles funding gaps by focusing on the most granular level: individual teacher requests. Alix, a former math and science teacher, edtech founder, and nonprofit leader, shares why he believes listening to the front linesthe teachersis the most important strategic bet we can make to ensure AI fulfills its promise for all students.
Q: Your background as a public school teacher and startup founder is unique. How has that journey shaped your vision for DonorsChoose and its mission to resource every classroom?
Alix Guerrier: Im a proud product of the New Haven, Connecticut, public school system. I had a front-row seat to the resourcing challenges schools face, which inspired me to become a public school teacher. Despite funding constraints, teachers went above and beyond for their students, and I saw the potential of a grassroots approach that serves individual teachers, which I later brought to my startup.
DonorsChoose is unique because we maintain a laser-like focus on the needs of individual teachers and their students, while partnering with school, district, and state leaders. Together, we can learn from the grassroots innovation, then use those insights to shape broader policy and funding decisions, which we have been leaning into as an organization.
Q: DonorsChoose has an unrivaled view of teacher needs. What is your data currently telling you about changing trends in classroom requests?
Alix: We have access to a wealth of qualitative and quantitative data, because our model requires teachers to submit descriptions of the resources they need and how they plan to use them. Some requests remain the same year over year. For example, books were a primary request at our founding in 2000 and remain an important need today.
Instructional technology, however, has been a major category of change. Over the past 25 years, weve tracked the shift from older tech to smartboards and Chromebooks. And starting in 2020, we saw a dramatic, sustained change in the amount of instructional technology requested. While AI-specific requests are still a small category, they are rapidly growing. Last school year, we saw around 600 requests for AI learning tools and resources; that number is already 1,000+ this school year.
What has been most surprising is the primary AI use case emerging from our data. We expected to see requests centered on student productivity or teacher planning, and those exist. But the majority are focused on addressing diverse student needs. Teachers are using AI to generate real-time translation tools for multilingual language learners, or to rapidly adapt a lesson plan for students with disabilities. We are seeing teachers leverage AI to hyper-personalize learning.
Q: How can we ensure that AI funding doesnt exacerbate existing challenges, like the digital divide?
Alix: Resource equity is explicitly woven into DonorsChoose DNA. Its our goal that every student in every community has access to a great education regardless of a schools resources. This year, over 80% of funding directed through DonorsChoose went to projects in historically under-resourced schools. Moreover, our work to close the digital resource gap felt by these schools must include AI learning tools.
Access to the hardware is only part of the equation. We know that the vast majority of teachers97%, according to a survey we conducteddont feel they have the necessary training to successfully implement AI in the classroom. Educators have a hunger and readiness to incorporate AI learning tools, but theres a clear gap in preparedness. This points to our biggest strategic bet: The sector-wide conversation about the future of AI in K-12 education must be driven by what teachers know about the actual needs of their kids.
Q: If you had a single message for those designing the next wave of AI tools and the policymakers making education funding decisions, what would it be?
Alix: Stay forcefully focused on the needs and experiences of students.
In education, as in other fields, new technologies are often first adopted by individuals on the groundthe teachers running micro-experiments every day in their classrooms. Their collective wisdom about what works and enables a better learning outcome is an invaluable dataset. If we, as a sector, choose to be guided by those use casesthe ways teachers are actually succeeding, like using AI to personalize learning for a non-native English speakerwe can effectively scale.
The technologies that truly support student learning and growth are those that are human-centered, supporting a learners exploration and creativity. By staying anchored to the individual learner, we ensure the immense power of AI is directed toward the highest and best usemaking a meaningful difference in the life of every child.
Q: Looking ahead 10 years, what is the most important role you hope DonorsChoose played in ensuring this AI revolution was accessible, effective, and human-centered?
Alix: I hope we will have been the critical platform that elevated the teacher’s voice to the forefront of the AI conversation. We want to be the connective tissue that translates the thousands of successful, human-centered AI experiments happening in classrooms across the country into actionable insights for the entire system.
We have an opportunity now to steer the ship. We know more than ever before about how students learn and what they need to thrive, and we have the technology to make dramatic improvements. Our role at DonorsChoose is to use our unique access to the grassroots to keep the entire sectorthe companies, the foundations, the policy leadersfocused on the human impact, not just the technical promise. We are equipped to do amazing things, but we just have to decide to do so. And Im optimistic that we will.
Celia Jones is global chief marketing officer of FINN Partners.
The U.S. auto safety regulator said on Wednesday it has opened a defect investigation into Tesla Model 3 compact sedans over concerns that emergency door release controls may not be easily accessible or clearly identifiable in an emergency.
The Office of Defects Investigation said the probe covers an estimated 179,071 model year 2022 vehicles.
The investigation was opened on December 23 after the agency received a defect petition alleging that the vehicles’ mechanical door release is hidden, unlabeled, and not intuitive to locate during emergencies.
Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The company’s vehicles rely primarily on electronic door latches, which open via buttons rather than traditional mechanical handles.
While Tesla includes a manual door release for use in emergencies or power failures, experts have long argued that the mechanical releases are not consistently visible, labeled, or intuitive, particularly for rear-seat passengers.
Last month, Tesla was sued over a fiery Wisconsin crash that killed all five occupants of a Model S, who were allegedly trapped inside because of a design flaw that prevented them from opening the luxury sedan’s doors.
The automaker has also been sued by families of two college students killed in a Cybertruck crash last year in November in a San Francisco suburb, after allegedly being locked in the burning vehicle because of its door handle design.
The opening of a defect petition does not mean a recall will be issued, but it marks the first step in a regulatory review process that could lead to further action if safety-related defects are confirmed.
The auto regulator, NHTSA, said in September it had opened a preliminary evaluation into about 174,290 Model Y cars over reports of electronic door handles becoming inoperative.
By Akash Sriram, Reuters
It may be a very Merry Christmas for one lucky Powerball winner. The Christmas Eve Powerball jackpot is accumulating like a snowball tumbling down an epic sledding hill. The total is now so large, it’s a number rarely attainable even for high-stakes gamblers.
The prize has continued to grow after five drawings worth at least $1 billion went unclaimed with no ticket matching all six numbers. According to the Powerball website, that makes the current prize of around $1.7 billion the fourth-largest in Powerball history. It’s also the longest the game has ever gone without a winner.
Much like the holidays, Powerball is a game that brings people together to dream big and hope for a brighter future, said Matt Strawn, Powerball product group chair and Iowa Lottery CEO. We hope this growing jackpot inspires excitement and joy and, most importantly, good will to all. A portion of every ticket helps support programs and services that benefit local communities.
The next drawing takes place on Christmas Eve at 10:59 p.m. EST. And while it’s rare, a winner could claim the grand prize this very night. It happened once before, on December 24, 2011. Historically, Christmas Day has been a bit merrier for Powerball players, with four winners over the years having claimed the jackpot on December 25in 1996, 2002, 2010, and 2013.
Not quite a billionaire
Still, even if a lucky Powerball player’s Christmas wish came true (and what a wish!), that doesn’t mean they’ll have $1.7 billion in the bank when its all said and done. According to Powerball, after federal taxes the lump-sum prize will have an estimated cash value of $781.3 million.
But that’s before state taxeswhich vary widely across the countrycome into play. Some states take a hefty portion of lottery winnings: In Maryland, the tax rate is 9.5%; in New York, its 8.82%; while New Jersey takes 8%. Washington, D.C., imposes the highest tax on lottery prizes: a whopping 10.75%.
On the other end of the spectrum, a winner in Arizona would have to turn over just 2.5% of the prize to the state. Indiana and Louisiana take 3% and North Dakota takes 3.9%. A handful of locations won’t take a dime of the winnings. If you live in California, South Dakota, Washington, New Hampshire, Texas, Wyoming, Tennessee, or Puerto Rico, the jackpot is yours to keep after federal taxes are imposed.
Therefore, after all the taxes are sliced off the top, the final takeaway could range from $492,261,980 for locations with no state tax down to $408,272,230 for Washington, D.C.
While no one has walked away with the grand prize just yet, nine tickets in the most recent drawing matched five numbers, earning $1 million prizes: one each in Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, and two in New York. That drawing produced 28 tickets eligible for $100,000 in winnings, and more than 100 tickets worth $50,000. Hardly a Dollar Store stocking stuffer!
The S&P 500 hit a record high on Wednesday, with broad gains across sectors supporting the main indexes during a shortened Christmas Eve session.
The benchmark S&P 500 touched an intraday record high of 6,921.42 points, surpassing its previous peak in October, as investors continued to bet on more interest rate cuts from the Federal Reserve next year following mixed economic data.
The U.S. economy grew at its fastest pace in two years in the third quarter, government data showed on Tuesday, after the release was delayed by a 43-day federal shutdown. Worsening consumer confidence in December and a flat reading on November factory production, however, tempered the outlook.
Data on December 24 showed new applications for U.S. jobless benefits unexpectedly fell last week.
“Despite ongoing seasonal volatility, initial jobless claims remain in ranges consistent with relatively steady labor market conditions and don’t change our outlook for the labor market or Fed policy,” said Nancy Vanden Houten, lead economist at Oxford Economics.
Trading volumes were thin, with U.S. stock markets set to close at 1 p.m. ET (1800 GMT) on Wednesday. The markets will remain shut on Thursday for Christmas.
Micron Technology jumped 4% to scale a record high, extending its rally after issuing a strong forecast last week. Bank stocks were also among the top boosts to the S&P 500, with financials rising 0.4% to a new peak.
Recent gains in U.S. stocks have spurred hopes of a “Santa Claus rally,” a seasonal phenomenon where the S&P 500 posts gains in the last five trading days of the year and the first two in January, according to Stock Trader’s Almanac.
That period began on December 24 and would run through January 5.
At 10:36 a.m. ET, the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 167.50 points, or 0.35%, to 48,610.95. The S&P 500 gained 10.24 points, or 0.15%, to 6,920.24, while the Nasdaq Composite lost 2.48 points, or 0.01%, to 23,558.35.
U.S. equities have swung sharply this year as tariff-related headlines, concerns about high valuations in technology and AI companies, and rapidly shifting interest-rate expectations boosted volatility.
Wall Street’s “fear gauge” was hovering near its lowest since December 2024.
Still, the bull market, which began in October 2022, stayed intact as optimism around AI, rate cuts, and a resilient economy supported sentiment, with all three main indexes set for their third straight yearly gain.
In the year ahead, global markets will be closely watch potential successors to Fed Chair Jerome Powell, after President Donald Trump said on Tuesday anyone who disagrees with him would “never be the Fed chairman.”
Nike climbed 4.7% after Apple CEO Tim Cook, the sportswear giant’s lead independent director, bought about $3 million worth of shares.
Intel fell 1.6% following a report that said Nvidia has halted tests to manufacture on Intel’s 18A chipmaking node after initial tests.
Dynavax Technologies surged 38.5% after French drugmaker Sanofi said it would buy the U.S. vaccines company for around $2.2 billion.
Advancing issues outnumbered decliners by a 1.69-to-1 ratio on the NYSE and by a 1.33-to-1 ratio on the Nasdaq.
The S&P 500 posted 11 new 52-week highs and two new lows, while the Nasdaq Composite recorded 43 new highs and 117 new lows.
By Sruthi Shankar and Shashwat Chauhan, Reuters
The European Union, France, and Germany condemned U.S. visa bans on five Europeans combating online hate and disinformation on Wednesday, after President Donald Trump‘s administration took its latest swipe at long-standing allies across the Atlantic.
Washington imposed visa bans on Tuesday on five European citizens, including French former EU commissioner Thierry Breton. It accuses them of working to censor freedom of speech or unfairly target U.S. tech giants with burdensome regulation.
The bans mark a fresh escalation against Europe, a region Washington argues is fast becoming irrelevant due to its weak defences, inability to tackle immigration, needless red tape, and “censorship” of far-right and nationalist voices to keep them from power.
Europeans forces to rethink Transatlantic ties
They come just weeks after a U.S. National Security Strategy document warned Europe faced “civilizational erasure” and must course-correct if it is to remain a reliable U.S. ally.
That documentand other comments by senior Trump officials, including a bombshell February speech by Vice President JD Vance in Munichhave upended postwar assumptions about Europe’s close relationship with its strongest ally, and concentrated minds across European capitals on the urgent need to diversify away from reliance on U.S. technology and defence.
In Brussels, Paris, and Berlin, senior officials condemned the U.S. bans and defended Europe’s right to legislate on how foreign companies operate locally.
A European Commission spokesperson said it “strongly condemns the U.S. decision”, adding: “Freedom of expression is a fundamental right in Europe and a shared core value with the United States across the democratic world.”
The spokesperson said the EU would seek answers from Washington, but said it could “respond swiftly and decisively” against the “unjustified measures”.
French President Emmanuel Macron, who has been travelling across France to warn about the dangers that disinformation poses to democracy, said he had spoken with Breton and thanked him for his work.
“We will not give up, and we will protect Europe’s independence and the freedom of Europeans,” Macron said on X.
DSA angers DC
Breton, a former French finance minister and the European commissioner for the internal market from 2019 to 2024, was one of the architects of the EU’s Digital Services Act.
A landmark piece of legislation, the DSA aims to make the internet safer by compelling tech giants to do more to tackle illegal content, including hate speech and child sexual abuse material.
But the DSA has riled the Trump administration, which accuses the EU of placing “undue” restrictions on freedom of expression in its efforts to combat hateful speech, misinformation, and disinformation. It also argues that the DSA unfairly targets U.S. tech giants and U.S. citizens.
Trump officials were particularly upset earlier this month when Brussels sanctioned Elon Musk’s X platform, fining it 120 million euros for breaching online content rules. Musk and Breton have often sparred online over EU tech regulation, with Musk referring to him as the “tyrant of Europe”.
Breton, the most high-profile individual targeted, wrote on X: “Is McCarthy’s witch hunt back?”
Germany says bans on activists ‘unacceptable’
The bans also targeted Imran Ahmed, the British CEO of the U.S.-based Center for Countering Digital Hate; Anna-Lena von Hodenberg and Josephine Ballon of the German non-profit HateAid; and Clare Melford, co-founder of the Global Disinformation Index, according to U.S. Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers.
Germany’s justice ministry said the two German activists had the government’s “support and solidarity” and the visa bans on them were unacceptable, adding that HateAid supported people affected by unlawful digital hate speech.
“Anyone who describes this as censorship is misrepresenting our constitutional system,” it said in a statement. “The rules by which we want to live in the digital space in Germany and in Europe are not decided in Washington.”
Britain said it was committed to upholding the right to free speech.
“While every country has the right to set its own visa rules, we support the laws and institutions which are working to keep the internet free from the most harmful content,” a British government spokesperson said in a statement.
A Global Disinformation Index spokesperson called the visa bans “an authoritarian attack on free speech and an egregious act of government censorship.”
“The Trump Administration is, once again, using the full weight of the federal government to intimidate, censor, and silence voices they disagree with,” they said. “Their actions today are immoral, unlawful, and un-American.”
Breton is not the first French person to be sanctioned by the Trump administration.
In August, Washington sanctioned French judge Nicolas Yann Guillou, who sits on the International Criminal Court, for the tribunal’s targeting of Israeli leaders and a past decision to investigate U.S. officials.
Sudip Kar-Gupta, Gabriel Stargardter, Sarah Marsh, and Sam Tabahriti, Reuters
In many states, you can get kicked out of your home if the local government thinks someone else will generate more tax revenue.
The Takings Clause is a part of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and it says that if the government wants to take away someone’s private property, they have to do it in a way that’s fair. Most of us grew up hearing adults say that life isnt fair. And theyre rightit isnt. Neither is an authority forcing you to give up your property for whatever they think is fair.
Courts have said the government can take your property if it’s for something that benefits the public, like building a road or a park. As if that couldnt go wrong.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
How did we get here?!
In the years leading up to the American Revolution, the British government had a policy of taking land from private citizens and giving it to favored individuals or companies for economic development. This practice, known as eminent domain or expropriation, was a major source of frustration for colonists, who were aghast at the violation of their property rights.
The Proclamation of 1763 forbade American colonists from settling west of the Appalachian Mountains, because British officials might move to the colonies and want some land. This policy prevented colonists from using the land for farming or hunting, and was one of the factors that contributed to the war for independence.
The overreach by a central authority was fresh in Americans minds when the Virginia Declaration of Rights was adopted in 1776. Its one of this countrys earliest documents to recognize the importance of property rights. The Declaration said “all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which . . . the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
Property rights are essential to individual liberty and should be protected by the government, but there was always a fanbase for central power. During the debates at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, there was significant discussion about the need to protect private property rights. James Madison argued that without such protections, the government could seize property at will, which would be a threat to individual liberty. Madison proposed a protection of property rights, which eventually became the Fifth Amendment.
This was only a decade after Americans experienced the widespread abuse of eminent domain that some of their new leaders were saying ackshully, taking your property by force is for the greater good.
In the early 19th century, the Supreme Court ruled that private property could only be taken for public use and with just compensation. This principle was reaffirmed in several cases, including Pumpelly v. Green Bay Co. (1872) and Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co. v. City of Chicago (1897).
Later decisions expanded on this idea, such as the landmark case of Kelo v. City of New London in 2005, which held that the government could take private property for economic development purposes.
Kelo v. The Man
In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled the government could use its power to take Susette Kelos private property for economic development purposes, even though her property was not blighted or in disrepair. The city where she lived wanted Pfizer to have her property along with a bunch of other properties, because Pfizer would generate more tax revenue than a lowly nurse and other working class households.
The homeowners in the affected area argued that this was an improper use of eminent domain, but the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the city, claiming the taking was permissible because it was part of a comprehensive redevelopment plan to create jobs and increase tax revenue.
Some states were angered enough to pass laws limiting the use of eminent domain.
Pfizer didnt even end up building what they promised, and the land ended up being sold for people not named Susette Kelo to live on Susette Kelos old property.
Why do I vent about this?
Because I want you to wrestle with the idea that eminent domaintaking property by forceis a power move. I want you to feel something between discomfort and rage when you hear about people being forced to let a road widening take over their front yard, or being forced to move out of their home to make way for some corporation.
Weve gotten to a place in modern culture where the press equates property rights and right wing extremist, sending a not-so-subtle message to readers or viewers that you dont want to side with those people. But property rights arent a right/left or red/blue issue. My most left-wing friend should be a staunch property rights advocate to hold big corporate power at bay.
The British Empire was hardly a left-wing operative, taking what they wanted when they wanted in the 1700s. And the City of New London was definitely not pushing a working-class agenda as it kicked out homeowners to make way for Big Pharma in the early 2000s.
If you shrug at a government having the power to take stuff just because, then all your other rights and protections are up for grabs.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
Bruce Springsteen said it best: “Santa Claus Is Comin’ to Town.”
While the rest of us are wrapping up work, Santa Claus is in the midst of his busiest day of the year, flying across the globe, distributing wrapped-up Christmas gifts to hundreds of million of kids.
Want to know where Santa is, and when he’s coming to your town?
For real-time tracking of Santa and his reindeer, NORAD, the North American Aerospace Defense Command, is providing a live feed all day on Christmas Eve, Wednesday, December 24, which started with Santa’s departure from the North Pole this morning at 6 a.m. ET.
Eager kidsand let’s face it, just-as-excited adultscan “see” where Santa is from moment to moment (at the time of this writing: Russia) over at NORADs website by clicking on View Santas route on a 2D map and Santa’s big red hat.
At last look, Santa hit some snow over Russia on his way down to the Indian Ocean, and has been delivering a lot of packages: 2,026,550,394 to be exact, at last glance at the gift tracker in the upper right corner.
What is Santa’s route?
NORAD has been tracking Santa’s route for the past 70 years, which traditionally takes him from the North Pole, down the International Date Line to the Pacific Ocean, through the South Pacific, New Zealand, and Australia. Then, he typically heads west through Asia, Africa, and Europe, before crossing the Atlantic Ocean to Canada, then here to the U.S., before heading south to Mexico, Central America, then South America.
However, keep in mind that due to weather, Santa’s route can change.
How to track Santa on social media
In addition to NORAD’s live map, the Command center is also posting updates on the NORAD Tracks Santa app, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and X; and precocious kids everywhere can speak to Santa by calling 1-877-HI-NORAD (1-877-446-6723).
A pro-Russian hacking group claimed responsibility for a major cyberattack that halted package deliveries by France’s national postal service just days before Christmas, prosecutors said Wednesday.After the claim by the cybercrime group known as Noname057, French intelligence agency DGSI took over the investigation into the hacking attack, the Paris prosecutor’s office said in a statement to The Associated Press.The group has been accused of other cyberattacks in Europe, including around a NATO summit in the Netherlands and French government sites. It was the target of a big European police operation earlier this year.Central computer systems at French national postal service La Poste were knocked offline Monday in a distributed denial of service, or DDoS, cyberattack that still wasn’t fully resolved by Wednesday morning, the company said.Postal workers couldn’t track package deliveries, and online payments at the company’s banking arm were also disrupted. It was a major blow to La Poste, which delivered 2.6 billion packages last year and employs more than 200,000 people, during the busiest season of the year.France and other European allies of Ukraine allege that Russia is waging a campaign of “hybrid warfare” to sow division in Western societies and undermine their support for Ukraine. The AP has tracked more than 145 incidents including sabotage, assassinations, cyberattacks, disinformation and other hostile acts that are increasingly draining police resources.
Associated Press
Chinese tech giant ByteDance has signed an agreement to sell a majority stake in its video platform TikTok to a group of U.S. investors. President Donald Trump announced a preliminary agreement for the sale on Sept. 19, 2025, following his negotiation with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew told employees in a memo obtained by news organizations that the company is working to close the deal by Jan. 22, 2026. Chinese and U.S. authorities will also need to approve the deal.
The deal creates a new U.S.-only version of the app, bringing it into compliance with a law signed by President Joe Biden on April 23, 2024, and upheld by the Supreme Court on Jan. 17, 2025. Specifics of the deal remain to be hammered out, but some details are emerging. These include what will happen to the video-sharing apps core algorithmand what that means for TikToks millions of U.S. users.
The Chinese government has indicated it will not permit ByteDance to sell the algorithm, because it is classified as a controlled technology export, per Chinese law. Meanwhile, U.S. tech industry executives and some lawmakers say compliance with the law requires the algorithm to be under American control. The deal as proposed includes licensing the algorithm so that it remains Chinese intellectual property while the U.S. version of the app continues to use the technology.
TikToks For You page algorithm is widely considered the most important part of the app. As one analyst put it: Buying TikTok without the algorithm would be like buying a Ferrari without the engine.
The algorithms value lies in its uncanny capacity to anticipate users content preferences. Many users claim it knows them better than they know themselvesa sentiment that has evolved into a curious mix of spiritual belief and conspiracy theorizing, as my colleagues and I have documented. Other scholars have similarly noted that users feel more intimately seen and known by TikToks algorithm than those powering other popular platforms.
I have studied social media algorithms for nearly a decade, exploring how our relationships with them have evolved as they become increasingly entwined with daily life. As both a social media scholar and TikTok devotee, I want to shed some light on how the algorithm works and how the app is likely to change in the wake of its sale.
How the TikTok algorithm works
In some ways, the TikTok algorithm does not differ significantly from other social media algorithms. At their core, algorithms are merely a series of steps used to accomplish a specific goal. They perform mathematical computations to optimize output in service of that goal.
There are two layers to the TikTok algorithm. First, there is the abstract layer that defines the outcome developers wish to accomplish. An internal document shared with The New York Times specified that TikToks algorithm optimizes for four goals: user value, long-term user value, creator value and platform value.
But how do you turn these goals into math? What does an abstract concept like user value even mean? Its not practical to ask users whether they value their experience every time they visit the site. Instead, TikTok relies on proxy signals that translate abstract outcomes into quantifiable measuresspecifically, likes, comments, shares, follows, time spent on a given video, and other user-behavior data. These signals then become part of an equation to predict two key concrete outcomes: retention, or the likelihood that a user will return to the site, and time spent on the app.
The TikTok For You page algorithm relies on machine learning for predicting retention and time spent. Machine learning is a computational process in which an algorithm learns patterns in a dataset, with little or no human guidance, to produce the best equation to predict an outcome. Through learning patterns, the algorithm determines how much individual data signals matter for coming up with a precise prediction.
A Wall Street Journal investigation found that the amount of time users spend watching each video plays a large role in how the algorithm chooses videos it suggests to users. Using the equation it has generated to predict retention and time spent, the algorithm assigns a score to each video and ranks possible videos that could be shown to the user by this score. The higher the score for an individual user, the more likely the video will appear in their feed.
Of course, content characteristics and other users additionally inform recommendations, and there are other subprocesses folded into the equation. This step is where algorithmic moderation usually comes in. If a video looks like engagement bait or has excessive gore, for example, the contents score will be penalized.
Here are the basics of how TikToks algorithm works.
Whats likely to change for US users
The sale has not been finalized, but the algorithms fate is coming into focus. According to reports, the United States-only version of the algorithm will be retrained on only U.S. users data. Users wont need to download a new version of the app for the changed algorithm to work.
Even though the algorithm itself is the same as before, its fairly certain that TikTok will change. I see two key reasons for change.
First, the proposed apps U.S.-only user population will alter the makeup of the underlying dataset informing algorithmic recommendations on an ongoing basis. As the kinds of content come to reflect American cultural preferences, values and behaviors, the algorithm may be slightly different as it learns new patterns.
Though users are more likely to stick with the app because they dont need to download a new version, not all users will choose to, especially if it is seen as under the control of Trumps allies. Under the current deal, Oracle Corp. and the U.S. government would oversee the algorithms retraining. This arrangement suggests that the U.S. government may have significant influence over how the app works.
The deal would give an 80% share to U.S. investors, including 50% to new investors Oracle, Silver Lake and Andreessen Horowitz. These investors have connections to Trump, and an apparent provision of the deal allows the U.S. government to select one board member.
These influences raise the possibility of a boycott from left-leaning users and creators similar to earlier boycotts of Target for rolling back DEI measures and Disney after the since-reversed suspension of Jimmy Kimmel. This may result in a user populationand datareflective of a narrower realm of interests and ideologies.
Second, its possible that the majority shareowners of the new app will decide to adjust the algorithm, particularly when it comes to content moderation. The new owners may wish to modify TikToks Community Guidelines according to their view of acceptable and unacceptable speech.
For example, TikToks current Community Guidelines prohibit misinformation and work with independent fact-checkers to assess the accuracy of content. While Meta used to follow a similar approach for Instagram and Facebook, in January 2025 Meta announced that it would end its relationships with independent fact-checkers and loosen content restrictions. YouTube has similarly relaxed its content moderation this year.
With reports that the U.S. government would oversee retraining the algorithm, theres a possibility that not only the new investors but also the government itself could influence how content is prioritized and moderated.
The bottom line is algorithms are highly sensitive to context. They reflect the interests, values, and worldviews of the people who build them, the preferences and behaviors of people whose data informs their models, and the legal and economic contexts they operate within.
This means that while its difficult to predict exactly what a U.S.-only TikTok will be like, its safe to assume it will not be a perfect mirror image of the current app.
This story was updated on Dec. 19, 2025, to include new details about TikToks sale.
Kelley Cotter is an assistant professor of information sciences and technology at Penn State.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
As 2026 begins, the workplace is rapidly changing due to technological advances, shifting labor dynamics, and evolving employee expectations. Organizations that anticipate and adjust to these changes are more likely to attract top talent, boost productivity, and stay competitive. From embracing artificial intelligence in the workplace to a continued focus on skill-based hiring, the future of work is being shaped by trends that could redefine how we collaborate, learn, and thrive. Here are three top workforce trends to watch in 2026.
1. THE AI-AUGMENTED WORKFORCE
The adoption of AI is quickly becoming a critical factor in modernizing the workplace. Companies and employees alike are recognizing AIs value and are actively weaving it into their daily operations and workflows. Rather than replacing jobs and skills outright, AI is reshaping roles and creating new opportunities to boost efficiency and improve work quality.
McKinsey Global Institute reports that AI-driven automation has the potential to generate $2.9 trillion in economic value across the U.S. by 2030. Their research suggests that unlocking this potential value will require more than just automating individual tasks. It involves rethinking entire workflows to enable effective collaboration among workers and AI assistants.
By automating routine, repetitive tasks like document preparation and basic research, AI allows employees to focus on more complex tasks and contribute in more strategic, impactful ways. A March survey we conducted with 1,000 HR professionals showed that nearly 70% view AI positively and find it helpful for their work. This benefit is particularly evident when automating initial, high-volume administrative tasks in the recruitment process.
The survey suggests that AI adoption is highest during the early stages of the hiring process, especially in job posting (39.7%) and résumé screening (39.5%), with larger companies more likely to use these tools due to a higher volume of applications. Usage drops for more subjective tasks like hiring decision (14%) and shortlisting (13%), showing a continued preference to leave key judgments and final decisions to humans.
2. SKILLS-FIRST HIRING AND UPSKILLING
With many industries continuing to struggle with labor shortages, more employers are reevaluating their hiring practices. To fill this gap, many companies are moving toward skills-based hiring. The transition to skills-based and skills-first hiring is more than just a passing trend; it’s a strategic response to evolving labor market dynamics.
A National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) found that 65% of employers surveyed reported adopting skills-based hiring practices for entry-level hires. Additionally, 90% of employers who use skills-based hiring report applying it during the interview stage, while almost three-quarters include it in the initial filtering process.
This emphasis on a candidates skills highlights a common misunderstanding between skills-based and skills-first hiring methods. Skills-first hiring primarily evaluates candidates based on skills, though other factors might still influence the decision. In skills-based hiring, a persons abilities are important but not necessarily more important than other factors like education or experience.
By embracing continuous learning, individuals can effectively bridge existing skill gaps and proactively position themselves for the jobs of tomorrow. Our March survey of 1,000 unemployed individuals found that among respondents actively seeking jobs, 59.3% of those who considered upskilling reported receiving a job interview compared to 48.7% who did not, a 21.8% difference.
Upskilling not only boosts their short-term marketability but also strengthens long-term resilience in a constantly changing workforce, ultimately leading to a more confident and successful return to employment.
3. A STAGNANT LABOR MARKET FOR NEW GRADUATES
The U.S. labor market is currently experiencing a stagnant phase, often described by economists as low-fire, low-hire. This means companies are not laying off employees, but they are also not hiring new staff quickly. While this stability benefits current workers, it creates a significant obstacle for the newest generation of workers, especially recent graduates. This is particularly true for those not pursuing in-demand fields, such as the healthcare industry.
NACEs 2026 job outlook reports that 45% of employers view the overall job market for 2026 class of graduates as fair. The last time the majority of employers (52%) described the job market this way was in 2021, when hiring expectations were similarly stagnant. This signals a return to when the market was still recovering from the pandemic, and companies were more cautious and hiring out of necessity.
Despite this bleak outlook for young job seekers, students are still optimistic. ZipRecruiter research shows that students overwhelmingly expect a quick transition from campus to career, with 82% expecting to land their first professional job within three months of graduating. While 77% do manage to find employment quickly, 5% are still searching for their first job.
While the present job market offers stability for current employees, it creates challenges for new graduates trying to succeed. Moving from college to a professional career is now more like a marathon than a sprint, requiring young job seekers to focus on building skills in high-demand fields and refining their job search tactics to navigate an increasingly selective employment environment.
FINAL THOUGHTS
The 2026 workplace will be influenced by emerging technologies, changing expectations, and evolving hiring practices. Although economic uncertainties and slower recruitment may pose challenges, they highlight the importance of innovation and adaptability in business strategies. Organizations that invest early in AI and focus on skill-based hiring are better positioned to attract and retain top talent, foster innovation, and boost productivity and growth. Recognizing these trends is essential for successfully navigating the rapidly changing labor market and maintaining competitiveness.
Paul Toomey is president and founder of Geographic Solutions.
