Renaissance College's Red Door Centre and Library Shine at Greater Bay Area School Awards
HONG KONG SAR - Media OutReach Newswire - 28 February 2025 - Renaissance College (RCHK) is thrilled to announce that its Learning Technology hub, the Red Door Centre (RDC), and the Library have been recognised for excellence at the prestigious Greater Bay Area ( GBA) School Awards. The school received the Judges' Choice Award in the 'EdTech Program K-12" category and was named a finalist in both the 'EdTech Program - Primary' and 'School Library' categories.
The Judges' Choice Award in the 'EdTech Program K-12" category recognises RCHK's innovative approach to modern STEM education. The RDC helps the school to integrate advanced technological programmes that empower students to explore, experiment, and bring their ideas to life. Through hands-on experiences with robotics, filmmaking, maker-centred learning, and visual content creation using green screen technology, students learn to apply their knowledge in practical and engaging ways. This approach fosters critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration—essential skills for success in the 21st century.
RCHK's commitment to fostering a love of reading and creative thinking was also recognised with its Library's finalist status in the 'School Library' category. The library serves as a dynamic learning space, offering a rich collection of resources and supporting students in their academic pursuits and personal growth.
'We are incredibly proud of this achievement,' said Mr. Stu Lowe, Vice Principal (Learning Technologies) at Renaissance College. 'These awards showcase the amazing work of the Learning Technology and Library Teams. Renaissance College embraces the use of technology to enhance teaching and learning across the entire school. Seeing that recognised in these awards is a tremendous honour and a reflection of our commitment to innovation.'
The following individuals were instrumental in this success:
Ms. Ness Matthews, Primary Learning Technology Coach
Mr. Sze Lok Kai, Learning Technology Educational Assistant
Mr. Stu Lowe, Vice Principal (Learning Technologies)
Mr. James Sandford, Secondary Learning Technology Coach
Mr. Jœrgen Mortsensen, Media Literacy & Authentic Technology Integration Coach
Ms. Kim Wells, Library Coordinator
Ms. Melissa Cooper, Library Teacher
Ms. Shirley Chan, Librarian (Teaching)
Hashtag: #RCHK #technology #awards #education #internationalschool #hongkong #gba
https://x.com/RCHKschool
The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.
About ESF Renaissance College Hong Kong
Renaissance College Hong Kong (RCHK), a student-centred independent school founded by the English Schools Foundation (ESF) in 2006, serves the local and expatriate communities. Offering all four International Baccalaureate (IB) programmes (PYP, MYP, DP, CP), RCHK provides a through-train education for students aged 5-18. With over 2,000 students representing 40+ nationalities, RCHK celebrates its diverse community, where English is the language of instruction. Students benefit from rich Education Outside of the Classroom (EOTC) and Creative, Action, Service (CAS) programmes, fostering real-world learning and community engagement. RCHK's Red Door Centre, a state-of-the-art technology hub, provides 1:1 devices (iPads Years 1-3, MacBooks Years 4-13), robotics equipment, and modern fabrication facilities, integrating technology across the curriculum. Wellbeing is paramount at RCHK, with strategies in place to ensure every child feels known and supported. The College also offers scholarships for driven and ambitious secondary students, and financial aid (Youth Empowerment Scheme) to promote inclusivity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
8 hours ago
- New York Post
8 Best AI Detectors in 2025 (tested for accuracy)
New York Post may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and/or when you make a purchase. We're all living in a digital fever dream. Between ChatGPT ghostwriting half the internet and freshman students submitting essays that sound suspiciously like TED Talks, it's getting harder to know what's real and what's…generated. And while I would love to believe my ex's emotionally intelligent apology text was sincere, I ran it through an AI detector and — shocker — it wasn't. But seriously, AI content is everywhere, and most of it is good enough to pass as human if you're skimping on your caffeine. Advertisement So, whether you're a teacher trying to sniff out a term paper that feels a little too fluent or a marketer vetting freelancers who write like a robot with a concussion, now you need tools that can actually tell the difference, and quickly. We tested the best AI detectors of 2025 — some really impressive, some totally useless — and here's what made the cut. Product Spotlight Best overall: AI Detector AI Detector Pros: Extremely fast Accurately detects multiple LLMs (not just GPT) Includes a rewriting tool to 'humanize' flagged content Cons: Limited to English AI Detector is the cool, competent sibling in a family of try-hards. You don't have to sign up, you don't have to download anything, and you don't have to pretend you know what 'perplexity' means. You paste the text, hit 'Detect AI,' and within seconds you get a detailed breakdown of how machine-y your copy is, complete with a percentage score and sentence-by-sentence analysis. It's fast, intuitive, and genuinely useful whether you're a content strategist, professor, or just suspicious of your friend's suspiciously articulate dating profile. We generated a wedding toast, adding requests for more humanization and details along the way, via ChatGPT. New York Post We plugged in the final wedding toast result by ChatGPT into AI Detector, and these were the (frightening) results. New York Post What makes AI Detector stand out is its range. It doesn't just scan for GPT-3 or 4 — it also flags content written by Claude, Gemini, and other models that most detectors pretend don't exist. There's even a humanizer tool that lets you rewrite flagged content to sound more human — perfect if you're working with AI but don't want to get caught in the act. That's right, it'll help you cheat the test it just gave you. You didn't hear it from us. We rewrote the AI-generated wedding toast ourselves and ran that through AI Detector, which yielded a much more positive result. New York Post Compared to every other tool we tried, it's the most consistent, fastest, and surprisingly nuanced when it comes to mixed-origin text (part AI, part human). It's basically the narc with a heart. AI DETECTOR Best real-time detection: Grammarly Grammarly Pros: Already baked into Grammarly, no extra tool or tab Flags AI while you're fixing your commas and passive voice Familiar, super easy to use Free version available Cons: Doesn't go deep — just gives a general AI score Grammarly's like that friend who's always correcting your grammar in group texts — annoying, sure, but usually right. And now, it's also raising an eyebrow at your writing like, 'Hmm… did you actually write this?' The AI detection tool is built right into the Grammarly app, so if you're already using it to fix your dangling modifiers and overly intense adjectives, you'll see a little alert pop up when your text starts to sound suspiciously synthetic. It won't give you a forensic breakdown or point to specific sentences like the other tools on this list, and it doesn't know if it was written by GPT or Claude or your friend's ChatGPT plugin named 'Cheryl.' But for basic detection without interrupting your flow, it's honestly kind of perfect. It's not the one you'd bring to court, but it's the one quietly judging your Google Docs in the background — and usually, that's enough. Best for academic use: Pros: Very high detection rates for GPT-3/4 Doubles as a plagiarism checker Supports batch uploads and institutional accounts Cons: Paid-only, no free tier Can be a bit overzealous with paraphrased human work is like that uptight but brilliant TA who actually cares about the integrity of your midterm essay. Built with academics and publishers in mind, it's one of the few tools on the market that doesn't just detect AI — it also checks for plagiarism in one seamless scan. It's a paid tool, yes, but if you're in a high-stakes environment where false positives are better than missing a cheater, it's worth the subscription. In our tests, it consistently flagged GPT-3 and GPT-4 content with an impressive 94% accuracy rate. What's more, it offers team management tools, batch uploading, and shareable reports, which makes it ideal for departments or institutions dealing with a large volume of student work. The UI is clean, the results are detailed, and the false positive rate is relatively low, especially for longer-form content. Where it occasionally stumbles is with paraphrased or hybrid content. Sometimes it reads an obviously human-written piece as 'suspect' because of certain sentence patterns or topic density. But in an academic context, caution usually wins out over leniency. If you're in higher ed and tired of guessing whether that 2,000-word essay on metaphysics was really written by a freshman, this is your guy. Best free: GPTZero GPTZero Pros: Totally free and browser-based No registration or email needed Clear sentence-level analysis and visual breakdowns Cons: Less accurate with newer LLMs (Claude, Gemini) No advanced features like file uploads or team reports Risks misidentification of ESL-written pieces as AI GPTZero doesn't charge a dime, doesn't require a login, and still manages to deliver sentence-by-sentence detection with visual cues that feel like a teacher's red pen, if the pen had an algorithm. It was literally created by a Princeton student for educators, and while it's evolved since its viral launch, it's still free and shockingly good for a no-cost tool. In our testing, it handled straight-up AI content well, especially from GPT-3 and early GPT-4 models. The results dashboard is clean, color-coded, and actually useful for non-techy users. You paste the text, it flags suspicious sections based on 'perplexity' and 'burstiness' (linguistic markers of robotic writing), and you get an instant sense of whether that student paper was written by a real person or a caffeinated chatbot. That said, GPTZero's biggest advantage — its accessibility — comes with trade-offs. It doesn't perform as strongly on newer models like Claude or on heavily edited AI text. And while the UX is great, there's no downloadable report or plagiarism check. But honestly, for a tool that costs less than a stale bagel, it punches way above its weight. Best for quick checks: AI Content Detector Pros: Free and lightning fast No sign-up required Great for casual, everyday checks Cons: Lacks deep analytics Doesn't distinguish between LLM models May miss subtle AI insertions If you're just trying to spot-check a paragraph before it goes live or double-check a freelancer's tone, AI Content Detector is perfect. It's stupid simple: paste text, hit 'Analyze,' and boom — instant score telling you whether the content reads as human or synthetic. No login, no tutorial, no existential dread (okay, maybe a little). It's not as detailed or as advanced as other options on this list. There's no sentence-by-sentence breakdown, no support for mixed-language content, and no visibility into what model it's actually detecting. But for speed and simplicity, it wins. It's especially useful in newsroom, agency, or startup settings where speed > nuance. We wouldn't recommend it for high-stakes content checks, like academic submissions or legal writing, but for day-to-day editorial use or social content, it's surprisingly handy. Think of it like a vibe check for your copy. Not deep, but effective. Best for businesses: Copyleaks Copyleaks Pros: Detects AI-generated and plagiarized content simultaneously Supports over 30 languages Offers LMS integrations and robust API access Granular analytics and side-by-side comparison tools Cons: Interface is a bit clunky for first-time users Pricing gets steep at scale Copyleaks is the enterprise workhorse of AI detectors. It's not just scanning for machine-written content — it's checking for plagiarism across academic databases, web sources, and internal libraries. It's used by government agencies, universities, and Fortune 500 companies for a reason. It offers one of the most sophisticated dashboards on the market, complete with similarity indexes, AI probability heatmaps, and team-level reporting. There's a learning curve, but once you're in, it's powerful. If you're managing a large volume of content, like admissions essays, agency output, or branded copy, Copyleaks earns its keep. Best multilingual: Sapling Sapling Pros: Supports content in multiple languages Clean, fast interface Works inside chat tools like Zendesk, Salesforce, and Gmail Great for customer service and business teams Cons: Lacks plagiarism checking Not ideal for academic-length documents Sapling flies under the radar, but it's one of the few detectors that performs well on non-English content. Built as a writing assistant for business teams, it includes a surprisingly capable AI detector baked into its grammar and tone tools. It's designed to be especially useful for customer support managers vetting auto-generated replies or chatbot content in multiple languages. While it's not built for longform content, its real-time integrations and speed make it great for quality control in fast-paced environments. Best for teachers: Winston AI Pros: Designed specifically for educators and writers High accuracy on GPT-3, 3.5, and 4 Supports PDF, DOCX, TXT, and image scans with OCR Includes reading level analysis and humanization suggestions Cons: No free version Winston AI is the honor student in the room — polite, precise, and academically inclined. What sets it apart is how well it performs with scanned documents and handwritten-to-text conversions, thanks to its built-in OCR support. It flags AI-written essays quickly and correctly, while also offering a readability score and humanization suggestions. Teachers and tutors will especially appreciate its classroom-friendly reports and side-by-side visual breakdowns. It's not flashy, but it is incredibly effective where it counts. Tool Best For Free Version Detects Multiple Models Plagiarism Tool Humanizer Tool Batch Uploads AI Detector Most use cases Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Grammarly Built-in/live detection Yes No No No No Academic and publishing No Yes Yes No Yes GPTZero A robust free tool Yes Partial No No No Quick one-off checks Yes No No No No Copyleaks Businesses Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Sapling Detecting multiple languages Yes Yes No No Yes Winston AI Teachers and SEO writers No Yes Yes Yes Yes The verdict AI content is no longer a novelty — it's the norm. And whether you're building syllabi, editing blog posts, reviewing resumes, or just trying to decode the suspiciously perfect text your friend's boyfriend sent at 2 a.m., you need an AI detector that's fast, accurate, and future-proof. After testing the top tools of 2025, AI Detector stood out as the most consistent and best overall performer. It's fast — lightning fast. It's smart — able to sniff out not just ChatGPT, but also newer models like Claude and Gemini, which many competitors still ignore. It's intuitive — no steep learning curve, just paste your text and get your results. And maybe most importantly in the current arms race of human vs. bot, it offers a rewriting tool that helps you 'humanize' flagged content without the awkwardness of rewriting from scratch. How we tested Our goal was to simulate the kind of messy, inconsistent, very-human behavior that AI detectors should be able to flag — and also the kind they routinely get wrong. First, we gathered a batch of fresh AI-generated text from ChatGPT-4, Claude, and Gemini. We asked each model to write essays, cover letters, Reddit-style rants, even birthday toasts (which, fun fact, GPT is weirdly good at). Then we got human with it — rewrote chunks, added slang, threw in spelling errors, and used tools like Quillbot to paraphrase whole paragraphs beyond recognition. We also used real human writing: old college papers, Substack entries, poetry, and blog posts that were 100% organic and occasionally unhinged. Each detector was tested across: Pure AI text Pure human text Paraphrased and hybrid text Short (100–200 word) samples and long-form (800+ word) entries We scored them on accuracy, false positives, false negatives, ease of use, speed, and transparency — aka, whether the tool told us why something was flagged instead of just wagging its digital finger. Bottom line: if a detector let a robot essay skate by or flagged a real person just for using a semicolon, we took notes. The tools that survived? They earned their spot. FAQs on AI detectors How accurate are AI detectors? They're good, but not omniscient. Most top detectors hover around 90–95% accuracy for GPT-3 and 4, according to Cornell University. But paraphrased or hybrid content throws a wrench in the works, especially if it's been human-edited. Can detectors tell which AI wrote something? Some can. AI Detector does a decent job of differentiating between ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini. But many tools just say 'This looks AI-ish' without naming names. Think of it like a scent trail, not a fingerprint. Will AI detectors stay reliable as models get better? Only if they evolve alongside them. As LLMs get smarter, detectors need regular training on the outputs. Tools that aren't actively updated (hi, random Chrome extensions) are basically paperweights. Do they work on non-English content? Mostly, no, and this is worth noting. Nearly all detectors are trained on English-language data. Anything multilingual or heavily idiomatic may either pass through clean or get flagged unfairly. Is using an AI detector enough on its own? Nope. They're tools, not judges. Think of them as bloodhounds — you still need human judgment, especially in academic or legal contexts. Use them as part of a broader strategy, not your only line of defense. For over 200 years, the New York Post has been America's go-to source for bold news, engaging stories, in-depth reporting, and now, insightful shopping guidance. We're not just thorough reporters – we sift through mountains of information, test and compare products, and consult experts on any topics we aren't already schooled specialists in to deliver useful, realistic product recommendations based on our extensive and hands-on analysis. Here at The Post, we're known for being brutally honest – we clearly label partnership content, and whether we receive anything from affiliate links, so you always know where we stand. We routinely update content to reflect current research and expert advice, provide context (and wit) and ensure our links work. Please note that deals can expire, and all prices are subject to change.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Micron makes massive $200 billion AI bet
Micron makes massive $200 billion AI bet originally appeared on TheStreet. Some readers may get the wrong impression that I am a Luddite. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, Luddites were members of organized bands of 19th-century English handicraftsmen who rioted against the use of textile machinery that was displacing them. The term is now used broadly to refer to people opposed to technological change. I criticize artificial intelligence, but that doesn't mean I am against machine learning. It can be used for good. Finding patterns in data that the human mind can't "digest" properly is very useful. It has already led to scientific recently launched supercomputer systems have been slapped with AI tags for marketing purposes, even if those supercomputers (hopefully) won't be used for useless stuff like chatbots. And to mention the Luddites again, we hear every day how AI will replace humans in the workplace, or that it is already taking jobs. More than 150,000 tech workers were laid off in 2024. It doesn't matter if it is Amazon, Google, Tesla, or Microsoft, tech companies are looking for ways to use AI, rather than humans, to generate as much code as possible. Relying heavily on AI to generate code, or "vibe coding," unfortunately, only works if a person can review the AI-generated slop. AI will surely work if you are updating a website that has been made hundreds of times before. If you want to build something original, you'll have plenty of mistakes to fix.I don't know about you, but I don't like fixing AI's mistakes. Even before AI, gigantic "enterprise" codebases were the topic of horror stories among programmers. These vibe-coded ones will make those codebases look great, if not impeccable. When these vibe projects get stuck, the developers hired back to fix all the AI-generated code should request higher pay to deal with it. More Tech Stocks: Palantir gets great news from the Pentagon Analyst has blunt words on Trump's iPhone tariff plans OpenAI teams up with legendary Apple exec Micron Technology, Inc. () is poised to profit from AI regardless of the project goals and is also helping to create more jobs in the US tech sector. Micron and the Trump Administration announced on June 12th that Micron plans to expand its U.S. investments to approximately $150 billion in domestic memory manufacturing and $50 billion in research and development, creating an estimated 90,000 direct and indirect jobs. The company plans to invest an additional $30 billion beyond prior plans, which include building a second memory fab in Boise, Idaho, and expanding and modernizing its existing manufacturing facility in Manassas, Virginia. The second Idaho fab will increase Micron's production of DRAM in the U.S., serving growing market demand fueled by will bring advanced packaging capabilities to the U.S. to enable long-term growth in high-bandwidth memory (HBM). HBM is indispensable to the AI market. As GPUs that power AI systems become increasingly powerful, they are bottlenecked by memory bandwidth. HBM provides the bandwidth necessary to leverage these powerful processors in the most effective and efficient manner. The more the AI market grows, the more the demand for HBM grows. This investment includes its previous plan for a mega fab in New York. This expansion plan includes two high-volume fabs in Idaho, up to four high-volume fabs in New York, and the expansion and modernization of its existing manufacturing fab in Virginia. Idaho fab is expected to start DRAM output in 2027. 'President Trump has made it clear that the time to build in America is now. In partnership with the Department of Commerce, Micron is announcing a $200 billion semiconductor manufacturing and R&D investment to bring the full spectrum of memory chip production back to the United States. Micron's planned investment will ensure the U.S. advances its lead across critical industries like AI, automotive, and aerospace & defense,' stated Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick. If everything goes according to plan, the factories will add many new job positions, but it will take time, as building a new semiconductor factory takes makes massive $200 billion AI bet first appeared on TheStreet on Jun 13, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jun 13, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fubo Announces Inducement Grants Under NYSE Listing Rule 303A.08
NEW YORK, June 13, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--FuboTV Inc. (d/b/a Fubo) (NYSE: FUBO), the leading sports-first live TV streaming platform, today announced that on June 11, 2025, the Compensation Committee of Fubo's Board of Directors granted restricted stock unit awards covering an aggregate of 33,497 shares of its common stock to nine new employees to induce them to join Fubo. The awards were granted under Fubo's 2024 Employment Inducement Equity Incentive Plan, and vest annually over a four-year period following their grant, subject to continued employment. The awards were granted as employment inducement awards pursuant to the New York Stock Exchange rules. About Fubo With a global mission to aggregate the best in TV, including premium sports, news and entertainment content, through a single app, FuboTV Inc. (d/b/a Fubo) (NYSE: FUBO) aims to transcend the industry's current TV model. Ranked among The Americas' Fastest-Growing Companies 2025 by the Financial Times, the company operates Fubo in the U.S., Canada and Spain and Molotov in France. In the U.S., Fubo is a sports-first cable TV replacement product aggregating more than 400 live sports, news and entertainment networks and is the only live TV streaming platform with every English-language Nielsen-rated sports channel (source: Nielsen Total Viewers, 2024). Leveraging Fubo's proprietary data and technology platform optimized for live TV and sports viewership, subscribers can engage with the content they are watching through an intuitive and personalized streaming experience. Fubo has continuously pushed the boundaries of live TV streaming, and was the first virtual MVPD to launch 4K streaming, MultiView and personalized game alerts. Learn more at View source version on Contacts InvestorAmeet Padte, Fuboameet@ JCIR for Fuboir@ MediaJennifer L. Press, Fubojpress@ Bianca Illion, Fubobillion@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
