Three CHROs on which skills matter most, how to build them at scale, and how to ensure leaders can guide organizations through rapid technological change.
BoA Credit Card Summaries
The Bank of America Preferred Rewards program has long been one of the most distinctive features of BofA credit cards. The basic idea is simple: if you keep enough deposits or investments with Bank of America or Merrill Edge, you can receive a bonus on your BofA credit card rewards.
The most popular tier has historically been the $100k tier, which gave a 75% rewards bonus. This turned a card that normally earns 1.5% cash back on everything into a very strong 2.625% cash back card with no category restrictions. That uncapped 2.625% earning rate was extremely competitive.
However, all good things must come to an end. Bank of America has officially changed the Preferred Rewards program and renamed it BofA Rewards. The changes went into effect on May 27, 2026.
First, let’s review the old Preferred Rewards tiers:
| Levels | Deposit/investment requirement | Rewards bonus |
|---|---|---|
| No level | $0+ | 10% |
| Gold | $20k+ | 25% |
| Platinum | $50k+ | 50% |
| Platinum Honors | $100k+ | 75% |
| Diamond | $1M+ | 75% |
Under the new BofA Rewards structure, the tier names and credit card rewards bonuses are:
| Levels | Deposit/investment requirement | Rewards bonus |
|---|---|---|
| Member | $0+ | 10% |
| Preferred Plus | $30k+ | 25% |
| Preferred Honors | $100k+ | 50% |
| Premier | $1M+ | 75% |
The biggest change is obvious: the 75% rewards bonus, which previously required only $100k in assets, now requires $1M. The $100k tier only receives a 50% rewards bonus going forward.
To be honest, this is not completely impossible to understand. After years of inflation, there are simply more people with $100k in assets, and the old 75% bonus was arguably too good to last forever.
There is one new benefit being added: a subscription credit for select streaming and digital subscription services.
The Preferred Honors tier ($100k+) receives an $8/month subscription credit, while the Premier tier ($1M+) receives a $15/month credit.
| Levels | Deposit/investment requirement | Rewards bonus | Subscription Credit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Member | $0+ | 10% | – |
| Preferred Plus | $30k+ | 25% | – |
| Preferred Honors | $100k+ | 50% | $8/month |
| Premier | $1M+ | 75% | $15/month |
The eligible merchants are:
This benefit requires activation, and payment must be made with a Bank of America checking account debit card.
Based on the current eligible merchant list, the $8/month credit is not especially easy to maximize as pure free money. For most of these services, you will likely need to pay at least a small amount out of pocket. The $15/month credit is much more useful and should make it possible to fully offset one of these subscriptions, depending on the plan you choose.
🇺🇸 USA Finance Channel Kaise Banaye 2026 | How To Create Usa Finance Channel | usa channel
Telegram channel link –
🚀 Kya aap USA audience ko target karke High RPM Finance YouTube Channel banana chahte hain?
Is video mein aap seekhenge ki AI ki madad se USA Finance Videos kaise banaye, faceless finance channel kaise start kare, aur YouTube automation se dollar income kaise generate kare.
Is complete step-by-step tutorial mein hum cover karenge:
✅ USA Finance Niche Research
✅ Viral Finance Video Ideas
✅ AI Script Writing
✅ AI Voice Over
✅ Professional Video Editing
✅ Copyright Free Visuals
✅ High CPM & High RPM Finance Topics
Agar aap beginner hain aur AI tools ki help se professional USA finance videos banana chahte hain, to ye video aapke liye perfect hai.
🔥 Learn How To Create Viral USA Finance Videos With AI
🔥 Build A Faceless YouTube Automation Channel
🔥 Target USA Audience & Earn In Dollars
🔥 Best AI Tools For Finance Content Creation
#USAFinance #FinanceChannel #HighRPM #FinanceNiche #tutorial
your queries –
usa finance video kaise banaye
usa finance channel kaise banaye
ai se finance video kaise banaye
usa video kaise banaye
2d cartoon style usa channel
How To Create USA Finance Videos With AI
AI Se USA Finance Videos Kaise Banaye
USA Finance YouTube Channel Tutorial
Faceless USA Finance Channel
ai Finance Videos Tutorial
USA Finance Niche Explained
High RPM YouTube Niches
AI YouTube Automation Guide
Finance Videos Kaise Banaye
How To Start Finance YouTube Channel
USA Audience Ke Liye Videos Kaise Banaye
AI Voice Over For Finance Videos
Finance Video Editing Tutorial
Best AI Tools For YouTube Automation
AI Script Writing For YouTube
Faceless YouTube Channel Ideas
YouTube Automation 2026
Earn Dollars From YouTube
USA Finance Content Creation
AI Video Creation Tutorial
Professional Finance Videos With AI
YouTube Finance Channel Growth Strategy
Viral Finance Video Ideas
High CPM Finance Niche
AI Generated Finance Videos
AI Faceless Video Editing Tutorial
Best Finance Niche For YouTube
USA video kaise banaye
USA channel kaise banaye
USA shorts kaise banaye
USA trending shorts 2026
USA me viral videos kaise banaye
USA audience kaise laye YouTube
USA trending shorts India se
YouTube USA channel grow kaise kare
USA videos India me baith kar kaise banaye
USA viral shorts strategy
USA faceless channel kaise banaye
USA niche ideas 2026
USA trending channel example
USA shorts viral trick
YouTube USA RPM benefits
USA shorts copy paste strategy
USA trending content source
US audience targeting tutorial
#usachannel #epicshivaji
source
A cyclical weather phenomenon that can drive flooding in one continent and drought in another looks increasingly likely to emerge this year.
El Niño occurs when the atmosphere reacts to a sustained warming of Pacific Ocean surface temperatures above normal levels. The water has been rapidly heating up in recent months, and the odds of El Niño forming by the end of July have climbed to 82%, according to the US Climate Prediction Center.
The looming El Niño could be particularly powerful. There’s a 67% chance it may evolve into a strong or very strong event — what’s informally known as a “Super El Niño” — heading into 2027.
While El Niño originates in the Pacific, its impact stretches across continents, rippling through crop and energy markets. Its return would come at a tricky time for the global economy, which is already contending with an energy crunch, fertilizer shortages and inflationary pressures due to the war in the Middle East.
El Niño was first observed in the 1600s by Peruvian fishermen, who noticed that Pacific waters were unusually warm around Christmas time in some years. They named this naturally occurring phenomenon “El Niño de Navidad” in reference to the Christ Child.
During El Niño, trade winds that normally blow east-to-west and push warm Pacific water toward Asia begin to weaken or even reverse direction. It’s unclear what triggers this shift, but it results in warm water drifting toward the Americas, heating large parts of the central and eastern Pacific Ocean. The extra warmth changes the atmosphere above the sea. Storm tracks shift and rainfall patterns move.
There’s no fixed timetable for when El Niño emerges. It typically appears every two to seven years and varies in strength and duration. The last event was in 2023-2024.
El Niño is part of a larger Pacific climate cycle known as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation, or ENSO. The cycle swings between El Niño, its cooler counterpart La Niña and a neutral phase in between. During La Niña, the east-to-west trade winds become stronger, pushing warm water further west and resulting in a cooler-than-usual eastern Pacific.
The immense size of the Pacific Ocean, which covers around a third of the planet’s surface, gives ENSO an outsized influence on global weather. While similar climate patterns exist in the Atlantic and Indian oceans, they don’t have the same reach. El Niño and La Niña events usually peak between December and January, although their effects can linger for months.
El Niño is identified by monitoring the temperature levels in the Pacific Ocean, most commonly in a region known as Niño 3.4. The threshold for El Niño used by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), is when the sea surface temperature exceeds the long-term average by at least 0.5C (0.9F) for five consecutive overlapping three-month periods. For a strong El Niño, the temperature difference must be at least 1.5C; for a very strong El Niño it must reach at least 2C.
“Super El Niño” isn’t an official term used by forecasters such as NOAA and the World Meteorological Organization. It’s been popularized this year as a very strong El Niño looks to be on the cards.
Very strong El Niños are rare. There have only been around a handful since 1950 and the last one was in 2015-2016. Severe weather events are more likely to occur when there’s a stronger El Niño, but they’re not guaranteed.
The heat that El Niño slowly releases from the Pacific Ocean into the atmosphere often pushes global temperatures to new highs. Scientists expect 2027 to be one of the hottest years on record, potentially dethroning 2024, which came in 1.5C above the pre-industrial average, according to NOAA.
El Niño doesn’t hit every region in the same way. The effects typically materialize in the tropics first, before spreading across Australia, Asia, the Americas and Africa.
Australia, southeast Asia, the northern US and Canada usually become hotter and drier, making them more prone to drought and wildfires. India can experience disruptions to monsoon rainfall. The southern US, Chile, Argentina and parts of East Africa frequently experience wetter conditions and a greater risk of flooding.
The Atlantic hurricane season often becomes quieter during El Niño years because increased wind shear — a sudden change in wind speed or direction — tears apart developing storms. The hurricanes that do form could still be highly destructive, but a lower frequency could reduce the harm to communities and infrastructure and limit disruption to oil and gas assets in the Gulf of Mexico.
There are usually around 14 named Atlantic storms from June through November — storms are given names when their wind speeds reach 39 miles (63 kilometers) per hour. NOAA expects there to be only eight to 14 this time around, in part due to El Niño.
By contrast, typhoon activity across the Pacific tends to increase during El Niño years. The warmer water provides more fuel for these tropical storms, meaning Asia could face increased risk of typhoon damage.
El Niño is one of the world’s most closely watched climate signals because it offers clues about storms, drought risk, crop yields and energy demand months in advance.
Utilities use ENSO forecasts to gauge demand for heating and cooling. Higher temperatures boost electricity consumption for air conditioning. This can strain power grids and trigger blackouts. Less rainfall reduces output from hydroelectric dams.
Commodity traders watch for threats to crops, mining operations, oil and gas production and shipping routes. Drought can lower water levels in the Panama Canal, which connects the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, slowing cargo traffic through one of the world’s busiest shipping bottlenecks.
El Niño can have both positive and negative effects but the global economic losses have historically outweighed the regional benefits. Scientists at Dartmouth College looked at the lingering five-year fallout from El Niños and estimated that the 1997-1998 event led to $5.7 trillion in lost gross domestic product globally.
Some crops benefit from El Niño. Higher rainfall in California, for example, is good for avocado and almond yields. However, many staples, including rice, wheat, palm oil, coffee and sugar, are produced in areas likely to face drier and hotter conditions.
Beyond the impact on land, El Niño can disrupt ocean fisheries. The warm Pacific water flowing eastward keeps a lid on cooler, nutrient-rich water ascending to the sea surface, resulting in fewer phytoplankton for fish to eat. Some fish, such as anchovies off the coast of Peru, may seek cooler, deeper water, making them harder to catch, while tropical species may venture to areas that are normally too cold.
Lower crop harvests, smaller fishing hauls and livestock casualties from extreme weather can threaten global food security and push up prices.
Scientists are still debating how climate change may influence the frequency and intensity of El Niño. Earlier models predicted that the natural phenomenon might become more common as the planet warmed. Yet much of the 21st century has instead been dominated by La Niña conditions, underscoring how much scientists still don’t understand about the ENSO cycle.
There are also concerns about overestimating El Niños and underestimating La Niñas as the oceans get hotter, given that they’re typically determined by measuring anomalous warmth compared with preceding decades.
There is growing agreement that a hotter world can intensify many of El Niño’s impacts. Higher temperatures can worsen drought in already dry regions, while warmer air holds more moisture, which can make downpours heavier during storms.
Students who enroll, pay housing fees, and physically live on campus are increasingly being funneled into online classes — raising a question about whether the on-campus price tag still buys an on-campus education.
A CalMatters investigation found that roughly 40% of all California community college classes are now online, even though most campuses fully reopened years ago. The majority are asynchronous, meaning pre-recorded online lectures with no live instruction. Allegedly, some recordings at San Joaquin Delta College are more than a decade old.
The pattern is not limited to two-year schools. The University of California and California State University systems are offering significantly more online courses than they did before the pandemic, and four-year campuses including San Diego State continue to schedule hybrid sections (one day in class, one day online) for core undergraduate courses.
Here’s an example from a Fall 2026 course listing for Econ 101 at SDSU. What’s interesting about SDSU is that students are required to live on campus for their first year if they’re not located in the service area, while still potentially taking online classes. This is more frustrating as students are required to pay fees associated with this, but don’t get the in-person experience.
Community colleges are funded largely based on enrollment, and students prefer online classes (particularly asynchronous ones) according to the system’s own research. That creates a direct financial incentive for campuses to expand virtual offerings, even when in-person sections fill faster or produce better learning outcomes.
However, online classrooms where most cameras stay off have also created a financial aid fraud crisis. AI bots and scammers are enrolling as fake students, submitting AI-generated assignments, and siphoning federal aid out of California’s community college system — a problem campuses have publicly acknowledged but not fully solved.
The College Investor has tracked the climbing cost of college, now averaging $29,910 a year at four-year schools and $20,570 at two-year schools. Tuition is up 914% since 1983, per J.P. Morgan, and the typical four-year graduate doesn’t financially break even on the degree until age 34.
That math gets harder when students pay for housing, fees, and the residential experience but receive a recorded lecture from 2013. With nearly 50% of community college students borrowing, the question facing students and families is no longer just how much college costs, but what the money is actually buying.
Don’t Miss These Other Stories:
Editor: Colin Graves
The post On-Campus Students, Online Classes: What Are They Actually Paying For? appeared first on The College Investor.
Stop screen-sharing. Start connecting.
Global interest appears to be fueling a notable pickup in issuance of real estate mortgage investment conduit securities at Ginnie Mae, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, according to a new report.
Processing Content
REMICs made up $80 billion or 40% of Ginnie Mae single-family mortgage-backed securities issuance year-to-date in April. In addition, financial disclosures show broader agency REMIC issuance was at its highest point in at least two years in March.
During that month, single- and multifamily REMIC issuance combined accounted for $24.36 billion at Ginnie, $19.54 billion at Freddie and $13.64 billion at Fannie, bringing the total for all three agencies to more than $57 billion. Monthly totals generally run well under $50 billion.
The trend partially reflects international investor demand, which represents
“Many overseas investors seek high-quality U.S. dollar-denominated assets but may not desire the full duration and convexity exposure associated with traditional 30-year pass-through securities,” according to Ginnie Mae’s Global Markets Analysis report.
REMICs allow the cash-flows from collateral home loans to be carved up into tranches that have different maturities, rates and payment structures.
This helps extend the investor base not only to investors outside the United States but more generally to a variety of buyers globally, including depository institutions, insurers and hedge funds.
One trend that could further grow REMIC interest is careful relaxation of regulatory rigor instilled following the Great Financial Crisis overseas.
Ginnie Mae securitizations already have
Ginnie’s report points to efforts to modernize
Many Bilt cardholders are reporting automatic credit limit increases this morning. Cardholders have received emails showing substantial bumps. Many Bilt Palladium cardholders are seeing limits increase from $15,00, $20,000 or $35,000 to $50,000.
The emails note that rent and mortgage payments do not use the card’s credit line, giving cardholders more available spending capacity for everyday purchases. Bilt’s newer Cardless-issued lineup includes the premium Bilt Palladium card alongside the Obsidian and Blue cards. I’m not sure if Blue and Obsidian cardholders are getting the same credit limit bump.
If you have a Bilt card, it may be worth checking your email and the Bilt app to see if you received an increase.
Free credit limit increases are one of the few emails people actually like getting. Lower utilization and more spending room is always a nice combo. Also keep in mind that Bilt Rent Day is tomorrow.
Adm. Frank Bradley, head of U.S. Special Operations Command, told attendees of a recent annual special forces conference in Tampa, Florida, that troops “have to be very careful about how we come to (AI’s) employment and its inspiration into the delivery of lethality.”
Bradley said he can see a future where AI determines what targets to hit but that “we, as humans, have to have the confidence that … it’s going to deliver violence only where we intend it to be delivered.”
The remarks from Bradley, who oversees the units that handle the military’s most difficult and dangerous operations, about the need to ensure safeguards come as his boss, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is pushing to rapidly evolve the military through AI. It is a push that has led to clashes with some tech companies worried about safety measures.
Hegseth has insisted that the Pentagon be allowed to use the technology any legal way it sees fit. He told an audience of SpaceX employees in January he would reject any AI models “that won’t allow you to fight wars” and that his vision for the technology was systems that operate “without ideological constraints that limit lawful military applications.”
AI’s use in the military is part of the Republican administration’s larger push to grow the capability it sees as a unique American advantage even as it faces pressure to ensure responsible safeguards.
President Donald Trump abruptly called off plans to sign a new AI executive order hours before an expected White House ceremony over concerns the measure could dull America’s edge on AI technology.
“We’re leading China, we’re leading everybody, and I don’t want to do anything that’s going to get in the way of that lead,” Trump told reporters.
When asked about Bradley’s remarks, a Pentagon official said efforts are focused on using AI to create “functional battlefield tools” that can help troops come up with and identify targets more quickly and, as a result, speed up strikes on those targets. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to offer more candid remarks.
Officials at U.S. Special Operations Command talked about AI not as something that will help eliminate targets but rather as a tool that can offer troops more time to focus on their mission.
Sgt. Maj. Andrew Krogman, the top enlisted official for U.S. Special Operations Command, said at the conference that he sees AI handling administrative tasks to free up operators or helping modernize how the command does business.
Melissa Johnson, the top acquisition official for the command, said AI should be “reducing the cognitive workload on mundane tasks.”
“We’re leveraging AI more and more, but it’s not to replace operator judgment, it’s to enhance it,” she added.
Helen Toner, interim executive director at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, said those differing descriptions about AI in the military are both true.
“There are a huge number of potential uses for AI in these kinds of bureaucratic settings, which the U.S. military is actively exploring,” Toner said.
Lt. Gen. Michael Conley, head of Air Force Special Operations Command, told a congressional committee in May that his troops used AI “bots” to convert top secret intelligence down to a secret classification within seconds to make it easier to share with drone operators on the ground during the Iran war.
However, there is no doubt that AI also is helping the military find and strike targets.
The center that Toner oversees published a case study two years ago on how the Army’s 18th Airborne Corps used AI to target artillery strikes “just as efficiently as the best unit in recent American history” and with 2,000 fewer service members.
“Human operators are still the ones making crucial decisions, but AI … is making it possible to operate with a new level of speed and scale,” she said.
The clash over the integration of AI into the military, who ultimately controls the technology and the ethics behind its use has played out in unusually public fashion during the Trump administration.
Hegseth and Anthropic are embroiled in a bitter contract dispute over the company’s concerns about unchecked government use of its technology, including the dangers of fully autonomous armed drones and of AI-assisted mass surveillance that could track dissent.
After CEO Dario Amodei refused to back down over concerns about how the chatbot Claude is used in classified Pentagon networks, both Trump and Hegseth accused Anthropic of endangering national security.
The Pentagon formally labeled the San Francisco-based company a supply chain risk — ending its $200 million defense contract and prohibited other government contractors from working with the company.
Anthropic sued, claiming the Pentagon is illegally retaliating by stigmatizing the company with a designation meant to protect against sabotage of national security systems by foreign adversaries. The Pentagon has since emphasized its turn to Anthropic rivals — including Google, OpenAI and SpaceX — to secure AI technology that can “augment warfighter decision-making in complex operational environments.”
Toner, a former OpenAI board member ousted after a clash with CEO Sam Altman, said “the general public often seems to underestimate the caution with which the U.S. military approaches new technologies.”
“Commanders want their missions to succeed, which means both being able to create lethal effects at scale, and avoiding unintended effects like friendly fire, civilian casualties, or simply identifying targets incorrectly,” she said.The Trump administration is pushing to unleash the power of artificial intelligence for the U.S. military while facing calls to put up guardrails around the rapidly developing technology from some companies — and even notes of caution from top leaders in uniform.
Adm. Frank Bradley, head of U.S. Special Operations Command, told attendees of a recent annual special forces conference in Tampa, Florida, that troops “have to be very careful about how we come to (AI’s) employment and its inspiration into the delivery of lethality.”
Bradley said he can see a future where AI determines what targets to hit but that “we, as humans, have to have the confidence that … it’s going to deliver violence only where we intend it to be delivered.”
The remarks from Bradley, who oversees the units that handle the military’s most difficult and dangerous operations, about the need to ensure safeguards come as his boss, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is pushing to rapidly evolve the military through AI. It is a push that has led to clashes with some tech companies worried about safety measures.
Hegseth has insisted that the Pentagon be allowed to use the technology any legal way it sees fit. He told an audience of SpaceX employees in January he would reject any AI models “that won’t allow you to fight wars” and that his vision for the technology was systems that operate “without ideological constraints that limit lawful military applications.”
AI’s use in the military is part of the Republican administration’s larger push to grow the capability it sees as a unique American advantage even as it faces pressure to ensure responsible safeguards.
President Donald Trump abruptly called off plans to sign a new AI executive order hours before an expected White House ceremony over concerns the measure could dull America’s edge on AI technology.
“We’re leading China, we’re leading everybody, and I don’t want to do anything that’s going to get in the way of that lead,” Trump told reporters.
When asked about Bradley’s remarks, a Pentagon official said efforts are focused on using AI to create “functional battlefield tools” that can help troops come up with and identify targets more quickly and, as a result, speed up strikes on those targets. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to offer more candid remarks.
Officials at U.S. Special Operations Command talked about AI not as something that will help eliminate targets but rather as a tool that can offer troops more time to focus on their mission.
Sgt. Maj. Andrew Krogman, the top enlisted official for U.S. Special Operations Command, said at the conference that he sees AI handling administrative tasks to free up operators or helping modernize how the command does business.
Melissa Johnson, the top acquisition official for the command, said AI should be “reducing the cognitive workload on mundane tasks.”
“We’re leveraging AI more and more, but it’s not to replace operator judgment, it’s to enhance it,” she added.
Helen Toner, interim executive director at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, said those differing descriptions about AI in the military are both true.
“There are a huge number of potential uses for AI in these kinds of bureaucratic settings, which the U.S. military is actively exploring,” Toner said.
Lt. Gen. Michael Conley, head of Air Force Special Operations Command, told a congressional committee in May that his troops used AI “bots” to convert top secret intelligence down to a secret classification within seconds to make it easier to share with drone operators on the ground during the Iran war.
However, there is no doubt that AI also is helping the military find and strike targets.
The center that Toner oversees published a case study two years ago on how the Army’s 18th Airborne Corps used AI to target artillery strikes “just as efficiently as the best unit in recent American history” and with 2,000 fewer service members.
“Human operators are still the ones making crucial decisions, but AI … is making it possible to operate with a new level of speed and scale,” she said.
The clash over the integration of AI into the military, who ultimately controls the technology and the ethics behind its use has played out in unusually public fashion during the Trump administration.
Hegseth and Anthropic are embroiled in a bitter contract dispute over the company’s concerns about unchecked government use of its technology, including the dangers of fully autonomous armed drones and of AI-assisted mass surveillance that could track dissent.
After CEO Dario Amodei refused to back down over concerns about how the chatbot Claude is used in classified Pentagon networks, both Trump and Hegseth accused Anthropic of endangering national security.
The Pentagon formally labeled the San Francisco-based company a supply chain risk — ending its $200 million defense contract and prohibited other government contractors from working with the company.
Anthropic sued, claiming the Pentagon is illegally retaliating by stigmatizing the company with a designation meant to protect against sabotage of national security systems by foreign adversaries. The Pentagon has since emphasized its turn to Anthropic rivals — including Google, OpenAI and SpaceX — to secure AI technology that can “augment warfighter decision-making in complex operational environments.”
Toner, a former OpenAI board member ousted after a clash with CEO Sam Altman, said “the general public often seems to underestimate the caution with which the U.S. military approaches new technologies.”
“Commanders want their missions to succeed, which means both being able to create lethal effects at scale, and avoiding unintended effects like friendly fire, civilian casualties, or simply identifying targets incorrectly,” she said.
The Trump administration is pushing to unleash the power of artificial intelligence for the U.S. military while facing calls to put up guardrails around the rapidly developing technology from some companies — and even notes of caution from top leaders in uniform.
Adm. Frank Bradley, head of U.S. Special Operations Command, told attendees of a recent annual special forces conference in Tampa, Florida, that troops “have to be very careful about how we come to (AI’s) employment and its inspiration into the delivery of lethality.”
Bradley said he can see a future where AI determines what targets to hit but that “we, as humans, have to have the confidence that … it’s going to deliver violence only where we intend it to be delivered.”
The remarks from Bradley, who oversees the units that handle the military’s most difficult and dangerous operations, about the need to ensure safeguards come as his boss, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is pushing to rapidly evolve the military through AI. It is a push that has led to clashes with some tech companies worried about safety measures.
Hegseth has insisted that the Pentagon be allowed to use the technology any legal way it sees fit. He told an audience of SpaceX employees in January he would reject any AI models “that won’t allow you to fight wars” and that his vision for the technology was systems that operate “without ideological constraints that limit lawful military applications.”
AI’s use in the military is part of the Republican administration’s larger push to grow the capability it sees as a unique American advantage even as it faces pressure to ensure responsible safeguards.
President Donald Trump abruptly called off plans to sign a new AI executive order hours before an expected White House ceremony over concerns the measure could dull America’s edge on AI technology.
“We’re leading China, we’re leading everybody, and I don’t want to do anything that’s going to get in the way of that lead,” Trump told reporters.
When asked about Bradley’s remarks, a Pentagon official said efforts are focused on using AI to create “functional battlefield tools” that can help troops come up with and identify targets more quickly and, as a result, speed up strikes on those targets. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to offer more candid remarks.
Officials at U.S. Special Operations Command talked about AI not as something that will help eliminate targets but rather as a tool that can offer troops more time to focus on their mission.
Sgt. Maj. Andrew Krogman, the top enlisted official for U.S. Special Operations Command, said at the conference that he sees AI handling administrative tasks to free up operators or helping modernize how the command does business.
Melissa Johnson, the top acquisition official for the command, said AI should be “reducing the cognitive workload on mundane tasks.”
“We’re leveraging AI more and more, but it’s not to replace operator judgment, it’s to enhance it,” she added.
Helen Toner, interim executive director at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology, said those differing descriptions about AI in the military are both true.
“There are a huge number of potential uses for AI in these kinds of bureaucratic settings, which the U.S. military is actively exploring,” Toner said.
Lt. Gen. Michael Conley, head of Air Force Special Operations Command, told a congressional committee in May that his troops used AI “bots” to convert top secret intelligence down to a secret classification within seconds to make it easier to share with drone operators on the ground during the Iran war.
However, there is no doubt that AI also is helping the military find and strike targets.
The center that Toner oversees published a case study two years ago on how the Army’s 18th Airborne Corps used AI to target artillery strikes “just as efficiently as the best unit in recent American history” and with 2,000 fewer service members.
“Human operators are still the ones making crucial decisions, but AI … is making it possible to operate with a new level of speed and scale,” she said.
The clash over the integration of AI into the military, who ultimately controls the technology and the ethics behind its use has played out in unusually public fashion during the Trump administration.
Hegseth and Anthropic are embroiled in a bitter contract dispute over the company’s concerns about unchecked government use of its technology, including the dangers of fully autonomous armed drones and of AI-assisted mass surveillance that could track dissent.
After CEO Dario Amodei refused to back down over concerns about how the chatbot Claude is used in classified Pentagon networks, both Trump and Hegseth accused Anthropic of endangering national security.
The Pentagon formally labeled the San Francisco-based company a supply chain risk — ending its $200 million defense contract and prohibited other government contractors from working with the company.
Anthropic sued, claiming the Pentagon is illegally retaliating by stigmatizing the company with a designation meant to protect against sabotage of national security systems by foreign adversaries. The Pentagon has since emphasized its turn to Anthropic rivals — including Google, OpenAI and SpaceX — to secure AI technology that can “augment warfighter decision-making in complex operational environments.”
Toner, a former OpenAI board member ousted after a clash with CEO Sam Altman, said “the general public often seems to underestimate the caution with which the U.S. military approaches new technologies.”
“Commanders want their missions to succeed, which means both being able to create lethal effects at scale, and avoiding unintended effects like friendly fire, civilian casualties, or simply identifying targets incorrectly,” she said.
Ready to reload your portfolio with something other than another overpriced AI technology stock? If so, you’re not alone. The artificial intelligence opportunity is real, but stepping into its most obvious names here feels… uncomfortable.
Fortunately, there are safer, more affordably priced ways to plug into it. Nuclear power play Cameco (CCJ +1.93%) is one of them.
Image source: Getty Images.
Simply put, Saskatchewan-based Cameco is one of the world’s biggest providers of uranium used to generate nuclear power. It sold 33 million pounds of the stuff last year, preparing it for use after it was retrieved from several mines. The company is also a minority owner of Westinghouse, which builds and services nuclear power plants. Cameco did nearly $3.5 billion worth of business last year, up 11% year over year, turning $590 million of that revenue into net income.
That’s a snapshot of the company’s recent results, anyway. Why should investors be willing to take a shot on its stock here and now?
For years, it appeared the nuclear power industry was simply going to fade away, displaced by seemingly safer and more flexible renewable energy options like solar and wind. Those alternatives are still coming into their own. But driven by the artificial intelligence data center industry’s insatiable demand for electricity, the world is falling back in love with nuclear power.
An outlook from the International Atomic Energy Agency puts things in perspective. As of early this year, it expects the planet’s nuclear power capacity to grow by 160% from 2024 levels by 2050, in line with a forecast from the World Nuclear Association.
For further perspective, the World Nuclear Association reports that 75 reactors are currently under construction and another 120 are planned, versus the 440 that are up and running right now.
Cameco isn’t the biggest name in the business. In some respects, however, it’s the largest accessible source of enriched uranium used by a huge number of nuclear power facilities. The only supplier that’s bigger is Russia’s Rosatom, which has access to a massive source of raw uranium in the nearby country of Kazakhstan. This supply is largely locked up by logistical and geopolitical hurdles, however, leaving Cameco to serve as the chief supplier of enriched uranium in this half of the world.
Finally, buy Cameco stock like there’s no tomorrow just because it’s undervalued.
Today’s Change
(1.93%) $2.14
Current Price
$112.77
Market Cap
$49B
Day’s Range
$108.69 – $113.80
52wk Range
$58.18 – $135.24
Volume
126.5K
Avg Vol
3.3M
Gross Margin
27.44%
Dividend Yield
0.15%
Some investors might disagree with this assessment. Shares of this nuclear name are up nearly 80% over the past 12 months and up almost 300% over the past three years, as investors have gradually realized the immediate and massive power needs of artificial intelligence data centers. The stock’s also suspiciously gone nowhere since early this year.
Just know that analysts aren’t deterred. Most of them rate this ticker a buy (or better) right now, with a consensus price target of $131.78, which is nearly 20% above the stock’s current price.
