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. […]
Donovon
Those are the numbers that I am sure my wife would like, instead, since I am not working and supposed to be working on my thesis, it is more like 4 hours of reading and one hour of writing a day. So much time, that I am even looking a little closer at these “paid” blog positions that are cropping up everywhere. And since my thesis is about web 2.0 applications in the composition class room, I would love to hear more from you : )
Frances
That surely isn’t much! I think my numbers are more in the vicinity of Donovan’s. But with the school year starting again at the end of the week, they will (and must!) go down.
I can spend over an hour working on one single blog post, though. I envy the writers who can write so much in so little time. I’ll just blame English not being my mother tongue.
Jill
Yeah, it’s really not much – I’d like to spend a lot more!! And yes, when I actually write a blog post it can take a while – there are different kinds of posts though. This one was quick 🙂