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. […]
Dennis G. Jerz
I remember the first time I had the “There’s a test today and I’m not prepared” dream from the perspective of the teacher who forgot to create the test. I jokingly announced that to my students one day while passing out tests, and they agreed that that didn’t count as a nightmare. Some looked hopefully at the papers I was passing out, thinking that maybe I had forgotten after all and this paper was blank.
Jill
I don’t know, I think it’d pass as a nightmare. Not for them, maybe… Ayayayay.
Tracy Kennedy
Yeah – after reading her post about her nightmare a couple days ago, I had one of my own. You know, students revolting in class, telling you that you don’t know what you are talking about…then power point, computer and overhead not working etc etc. Luckily the class I taught this week went by fine. phew. I think this is common (I have a number of friends who are police officers, and they often dream that their gun doesn’t go off when confronted by a criminal).
Jill
The powerpoint, computer and overhead not working isn’t a nightmare, it’s STANDARD!
Yesterday I actually dropped the overhead. I laughed and told the students I’d dropped my powerbook from a far greater height, and with no carpet, and everything was fine – but the overhead projector turned out to be done for. A tiny plastic tab that keeps the arm up had broken off and even with wads of paper I couldn’t get the arm to stay in a position where it would keep the words on the screen in focus.
Probably that’s why my subconscious doesn’t bother plaguing me with nightmares.
And dreaming your gun won’t fire when a bad guy’s trying to shoot you’d be worse. Unless you could run, I suppose.