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. […]
Martin
SV has been talking about improving collective transportation systems since…well, forever.
Maybe if they (finally) get into Stortinget this fall, they’ll be able to do something about it.
I hope so. It’s a shambles. I have to pay 50 kroner to go to Sandvikstorget and back? That’s
insane.
(Oh, and the text box I’m typing this in disappears behind the comments & trackbacks column.
I’m using Firefox.)
ÿivind
We should be happy Bergen is such a horrible place to drive a car in, really. And in my opinion, a system where public petrol prices were sky-high while collective transport got off dirt cheap would be heaven. Less pollution in town, less annoying cars making even more annoying noise. And most importantly, no more missing the bus just because you had to wait forever just to get across the road.
Didn’t you just burst Carl I,’s bubble? The “petrol prices DOWN without any concern for general price index” guy?
dr. b.
Gas pricing is a huge political issue in these parts. When I first moved to Indiana it was a gubernatorial election year and they had suspended tax on gas for the year in order to help local farmers stay in business and to garner more votes. It worked.