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. […]
Lisa
Perhaps this will be of some comfort:
When I was still reading senior essays at Yale, one of my students worked really hard on a really brilliant study of William Carlos Williams’ epic poem about a certain town in New Jersey. Throughout this essay, which won a prize!, the author refers consistently to “Patterson.” Somehow, we both failed to catch that the town’s name is “Paterson” and so is the poem named for it!
Foy.
pericat
hehehe! In my thesis, my drafts (for years!) had these little marks in one section that correlated those bits to parts in another section (linking the German to the English, basically).
I intended to take them out. Honest, I did.
(I’m not giving the degree back, no matter what anyone says.)
Jill
Oh, I’m so glad not to be the only one who’s made ridiculous errors 🙂
Mark
In Stephen Heath’s Questions of Cinema, he inadvertantly states that Veronica Cartwright’s character is the only survivor in Alien. A student has commented in the margin(and dated it – 1983!) with “this is wrong. The author is talking out of his arse, like the lecturers here.”
And of course, that student would never have made any mistakes.
Jon
Smith – Andersen: De gutta har noe p gang; kanskje du ufrivillig har kommet med en profeti her 🙂
Eirik
But what you didn’t say, Jill, was whether you liked the movie or not. I saw it yesterday and was deeply disappointed. The script was far too long and chock full of quasi-philosophical platitudes, Reeves and Fishburne seemed bored and tired, and the CG effects were unimpressive. In fact, this limp sequel made me realize how flawed and illogical the original movie is.
Jill
Actually, Jon, my friend Frank just suggested that perhaps both Smith AND Andersen (aka Neo) are computer agents! What a terrifying idea, huh?
And whether I liked it or not? Well, I had been prepared for the worst so I was actually quite pleased. The pseudo-philosophy was rather annoying and a lot more obvious than I remember it being in the first film. Probably the first film was, as you say Eirik, flawed and illogical but I fell totally for it. Not so much for this sequel. I loved watching the fighting with all the matter-bending stuff happening – though even that got a bit repetitive, and Neo fighting fifty Agent Smiths really did get rather silly.
But heck, so it’s not Shakespeare, I’ll still be watching the next movie.
chuck
A similar story: a friend of mine who was writing a paper on The Sound and the Fury was running spell check and accidentally changed all references to Quentin Compson to Canteen Compson. I still haven’t seen “The Matrix” yet (other than brief flashes of images in my rearview movie at a drive-in theater), but I’ve been struck by the range of responses to the film.
Thomas
Well, if you made this error, probably more people will too… so you are just ahead of the curve, the first to put a common error into life. People who do research into errors in science will probably cry for joy when they find this “first” that will let them track the spread of this error. Or you could just cnclose an “errata” which would probably just make the thesis more interesting.
Jill
Canteen Compson! I’ve noticed that spell checks in Word try to change ergodic to regicide, which is quite amusing, in its way.
An errata may be the way to go, yes. And I’ve already found a couple of people who swear they thought the agents name was Mr Andersen.
Now I’m worried it might not be Andersen but Anderson.
George
You have to make 40 copies of your thesis for libraries around the country!?!?
Jill
Isn’t that normal?
Magnus
The movie’s website (http://whatisthematrix.warnerbros.com/) has a filmography of Keanu Reeves where his character in the Matrix-movies is listed as ‘Thomas A. Anderson/Neo’.
George
Re: 40 copies. I’m sure every system has its own requirements, but I had not heard of one where so many copies produced by the student were required. In the U.S., I believe it’s standard to have one copy (maybe two) in the library of the institution where you received your PhD, and then a commercial enterprise microfilms it. Anyone can buy a copy on microfilm or (usually) request a print copy from the library through inter-library loan. Requiring the student to make the 40 copies seems like an undue burden. You have my sympathies!
Jill
Oh, don’t worry, the university printers will do it for me, I just need to organise it! I don’t actually have to pay or anything. Thank goodness.
And thank you, Magnus, for doing the research and checking out the Andersen/-son thing for me. I’ll have to thank you guys in the acknowledgements of the thesis, I reckon 🙂