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. […]
“Games can make things more complicated, rather than less complicated,” Ian Bogost told Stephen Colbert last night on the Colbert report. You can watch the segment on the Comedy Central website – at least until the next episode of the Colbert Report is up this evening US time. Pity it’s not embeddable, or on YouTube… I’ve got to say, I’m impressed that a colleague’s on the Colbert Report. And Ian looked and sounded great. I’m looking forward to reading his new book, Persuasive Games.
The Chutry Experiment » Colbert Connection
[…] Just found out that one of my former colleagues at Georgia Tech, Ian Bogost, was on The Colbert Report the other night.¬† Bogost was promoting his book, Persuasive Games, as well as the Persuasive Games website.¬† The interview is lots of fun, and of course, as Jill points out, it’s very cool to see a colleague interacting with one of the funniest people on television.¬† As with most Comedy Central content, the video isn’t embeddable on YouTube, but you can watch it on Comedy Central’s website for at least the next few days. […]
The Ludologist » Blog Archive » Ian on a Roll on Colbert
[…] (Code for embedding from Linn via Jill.) […]
Linn
Yeah – the embedding button was very hard to find at it was only available for a minute. I wouldn’t have found it either if I hadn’t stubbornly sworn that I’d read somewhere Comedy Central was now including embedding. A sad design.
Jill Walker Rettberg
Well, thanks for finding it! That’s great that they allow embedding, since they took their videos off YouTube.