I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. , If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics). This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]
Liz
I saw Clay’s post on M2M, but hadn’t followed the link yet to the full story. Fascinating. Thanks for pointing out the dissonance between the rational economic analysis and the speculative futuring. 🙂
Jill
Well, you never know, he MIGHT be right! I don’t understand the economics well enough to know, really, it just feels like the rush of the Matrix (the first one..) to me, seeing the enormity of his ideas 🙂
Anne
I heard him mention this in his presentation at the Digital Genres conference, where he asked the audience which we thought would sell for more – male or female avatars. Most, including myself, raised hands in favour of females and I’m still surprised that male avatars go for more! (But then again, I believe that male prostitutes sell for more as well, but I always assumed that was the result of supply exceeding demand … )
But he also discussed why he doesn’t like playing females – and it’s because of the way they are treated by (apparently) male players!! And I believe it was his wife who commented that more men should experience that feeling! I laughed 😉
Jill
Oh, and yet Justin Hall always plays a female because he reckons that female avatars are treated better – or wait, that might be only in one particular game. (Scroll down to the bit titled “Drag in Dark Age of Camelot: Gender in Interaction” to see the bit about Justin in drag, though the whole article’s interesting)
Anne
Interesting! I’ll have to ask other guys about this – even though I always play a girl if I have the choice, all the way back to Ms. Pac-Man 😉 Were you surprised that female avatars for Everquest sell for less? Maybe it has somethign to do with being “sold”?
BTW, that would be demand exceeding supply in my earlier comment 😉
Jill
I just immediately connected it to prostitution (being “sold”, as you say, Anne) and wasn’t surprised at all. Now that you’ve raised the question I’m more curious. And no, I’ve not actually read Castronova’s whole paper, only the abstract and the conclusion (ha) so it’s possible that he discusses this in the middle somewhere. Anyone read it properly?
v i t i a
The Valuation of Web Writing
I’ve seen the Blogshares logo at some of the online places I frequent, so I clicked on it today. Interesting: a self-described “fantasy stock market for weblogs” where “weblogs are valued by inbound links.” Vanity must be fed, so I…