Search Here ….

Tags

affect AI AI slop AI STORIES alumni Blogging book care ChatGPT conferences cultural bias data analysis electronic literature ELMCIP ephemerality exhibition fascism Gephi history journalister lip-syncing LLMs machine vision network analysis norsk open access presentation publication publications R representation research science fiction self-representation selfies Snapchat social media Surveillance talks teaching trip report twitter UiB visualisation workshop
Uncategorised

reviewing oodles

Jill5 Comments

Huh. I just booked a hire car for while we’re in Australia, and I found this comparison shopping site called Oodles.com.au. And lo and behold they found me a car on Budget that was a couple of hundred dollars cheaper than anything I could find on budget.com.au. But I’ve never heard of oodles.com.au, and when I googled them, I couldn’t really find anyone else saying anything about them, and while the site looked thorough and well-designed and had lots of information and a link to Verisign confirming it really was secure, I suddenly got worried – cos you know, how does one know placing an order there will really result in a booking being made with Budget?

Well, I obviously haven’t got the car yet. But at least I got a confirmation email from oodles with a link to budget.com.au where I can change or edit my booking. And yes, the link works, and really goes to my real booking at budget.com.au. So I guess Oodles.com.au is cool.

Great name, anyway. And the deal was far cheaper than the alternatives. And now an actual customer has linked to them so future customers who wonder and google can find out what this customer, at least, thinks of them. I’ll update this when I’ve actually got the car…

Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

5 thoughts on “reviewing oodles”

  1. Lesley

    Hope you don’t have the same experience as me. I hired a car with Alamo via Whizz (sounds a bit like Oodle) but when I arrived at the Alamo desk at the airport they said, oh, look Whizz have made a mistake, they’ve rented you a Fiesta as a category C car when in fact it’s a category B car so that will be £40 more.

  2. Elin

    Perhaps you could call Budget to confirm your reservation in advance?

  3. Jill

    Yeah, I will – and of course the official Budget website does show my reservation, so I should be right – unless tehre’s a rpice thing, like Lesley experienced. I’ll let you know how I do (but probably not until after I’m home…)

  4. Jill

    It worked perfectly, and I got the advertised rate. So from my experience, yes, I’d recommend Oodles! Their rate was much lower than the one on the official Budget website.

  5. Anne

    I recently hired a car through Avis via Oodles. Avis didn’t have a car in my category, but upgraded me at no extra cost. Perhaps it’s the individual car hire firm that has the discretion, not the booking site.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

AI and algorithmic culture University politics

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

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. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.