This is some thoughtful analysis.

“HONESTY implies that we do not secretly use AI technologies without disclosure, and that one does not make unfounded claims about the presumed capabilities of AI technologies.” zenodo.org/records/1706... 27/🧵

I understand AI isn't going to disappear and I work with information professionals so it would be foolish for my colleagues to ignore it, but when my colleagues casually use it for a creative endeavor (especially producing images) I feel ill.

For clear visual reference, the study and some great highlights from it here: bsky.app/profile/oliv...

I LOVE this one.

Ouija board is the best analogy

Sherry Turkle’s phrasing was “evocative mirror” and I like that one. It always says more about the perceiver than the technology. Folks who think LLMs are smart are indiscriminate, those who think they’re the new Industrial Revolution don’t know anything about the old one, and so on.

Full paper here: zenodo.org/records/1706...

This is an excellent, rigorously organized argument against uncritical AI adoption that everyone in academia should read. In 50 years I think we’re going to look at universities scrambling to endorse ChatGPT Edu like we do those “4 out of 5 doctors smoke Chesterfields — The HEALTHY Cigarette!” ads

Ideas Worth Spreading (thread): Against the Uncritical Adoption of 'AI' Technologies in Academia

As seen in the table & figure above, we dissect and explain how terminology is abused and contorted by industry — terms like 'generative' or 'agentic' are not able to isolate what is being critiqued. We have seen this countless times before; flitting from one nonsense buzzword to another. 2/n

There are more fundamental reasons to be a critic

“Knowledge production is supposed to be safeguarded by (inter)national codes of conduct for research integrity (ALLEA 2023; KNAW et al. 2018) [that] forbid, e.g., fabrication of data, falsification of results, plagiarism, and, generally, distortion of the scientific record.” 25/🧵

Thank you! Also for in principle rejection of benchmarks bsky.app/profile/oliv...

"Universiteiten hebben hun rol als onafhankelijke kennisproducenten prijsgegeven door AI-technologieën klakkeloos te omarmen, stelt de groep wetenschappers onder leiding van RU-onderzoekers @olivia.science en @irisvanrooij.bsky.social (…)” www.scienceguide.nl/2025/09/ai-s... 3/🧵

Getting close to 50k views and I'm wondering is it just everybody is scared to say this and pleased I did? Because if there's so many of us who agree, trust me I'd know if 1k people disagreed with me let alone 50k, why are we letting AI ruin our universities? Together we can turn back the tide.

Excellent piece on higher education and the ongoing AI hype game.

🧵

Gonna spend the afternoon on some work related reading, one of the things I'm looking forward to is "Against the Uncritical Adoption of 'AI' Technologies in Academia" zenodo.org/records/1706...

"AGAINST THE UNCRITICAL ADOPTION OF ‘AI’ TECHNOLOGIES IN ACADEMIA" with (only) one U.S. signee who happens to be from my home institution zenodo.org/records/1706...

See this quoted thread for highlights from the lead author of this important paper! My own key thoughts and connections will be in a thread right here, too. 🧵

“RESPONSIBILITY precludes scientists from using AI products whose use is irresponsible, e.g. harmful to people, animals, and the environment, or otherwise in violation of legal guidelines (e.g. copyright, data privacy, labour laws …)” zenodo.org/records/1706... 31/🧵

"De wetenschappelijke integriteit staat op het spel nu universiteiten [AI] zonder kritische bezinning omarmen. Dat is de waarschuwing van een internationale groep van achttien wetenschappers, onder leiding van onderzoekers van de Radboud Universiteit.” www.scienceguide.nl/2025/09/ai-s... 1/🧵

“High technology is often as socially regressive as it is technically revolutionary or progressive.” Referencing the wonderful @histoftech.bsky.social, this critical piece on the uncritical adoption of AI in universities pulls no punches.

this entire thread is extremely ❤️‍🔥

We also make the case that the Turing test, the imitation game (see "Interlude: Can women think?" in https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/jqxb6…) rhetorically helps to form the founding historical example of Pygmalion displacement: when women computers were replaced by digital computers.

Follow them here: @emilymbender.bsky.social @alexhanna.bsky.social @olivia.science @irisvanrooij.bsky.social @timnitgebru.bsky.social and many more!

“De verwarring rond AI-terminologie wordt opzettelijk gecreëerd: de auteurs stellen dat er geen zinvol onderscheid bestaat tussen verschillende AI-systemen en dat pogingen om “generatieve AI” af te zonderen slechts dienen om de kritiek af te zwakken.” www.scienceguide.nl/2025/09/ai-s... 5/🧵

Move info on this website: olivia.science/ai by @olivia.science QR code goes here: doi.org/10.5281/zeno...

“To add insult to injury, many metaphorical … phrases (especially used to describe ANNs; see Table 1) — like train, learn, hallucinate, reason — are applied to machines and result in distorting how we perceive these machines: humanising them while dehumanising us” zenodo.org/records/1706... 14/🧵

🧵 Thread with my favourite quotes from: 📝 Guest, O., Suarez, M., Müller, B., et al. (2025). Against the Uncritical Adoption of 'AI' Technologies in Academia. Zenodo. doi.org/10.5281/zeno... 1/🧵

Oh, this is such a great episode. I am listening now and it's just so heartening to hear our ideas being repeated, extended, understood. Yes, AI — if allowed to — will destroy peer review.

"Correlation is not cognition" @olivia.science / @andreaeyleen.bsky.social

@zdnet.bsky.social thanks for writing this! > The authors urge educational leaders to act "to help us collectively turn back the tide of garbage software, which fuels harmful tropes and false frames to obtain market penetration and increase technological dependency." www.zdnet.com/article/stud...

New people are signing our open letter almost everyday, and it is so heartening to see. Especially good to see familiar names sign. openletter.earth/open-letter-...

💛🚫🤖 No AI Gods, No AI Masters 🤖🚫💛 I am massively excited to share the backstory ACADEMIC SHENANIGANS behind our Open Letter (& so this paper below too) — and as always big thanks to my co-authors {@irisvanrooij.bsky.social & @marentierra.bsky.social}: www.civicsoftechnology.org/blog/no-ai-g... 1/n

💫 Ooh, exciting! Listening to this right away ☺️ and I warmly recommend that you do too 😎

It's Peer Review Week. But what does that mean? And why the focus on AI? We discuss and dissect in light of our recent interview with @olivia.science and @irisvanrooij.bsky.social — because they rock! www.the-geyser.com/pod-are-we-b...

I collected some materials on critical AI from my perspective; hope it's useful: olivia.science/ai "CAIL is as an umbrella for all the prerequisite knowledge required to have an expert-level critical perspective, such as to tell apart nonsense hype from true theoretical computer scientific claims"

colleagues in computer science initiated this and I'm so grateful to them openletter.earth/open-letter-...

🩷💛 Check out @olivia.science ‘s CAIL website, with beautiful posters, video/podcast, papers and more! 🤩 olivia.science/ai

“In this position paper, we expand on why universities must take their role seriously to a) counter the technology industry’s marketing, hype, and harm; and b) safeguard higher education, critical thinking, expertise, academic freedom, and scientific integrity.” — from: zenodo.org/records/1706...

Loved how I got to clarify that the 5 principles in section 4 of the paper were nothing new. They came straight out of The Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, that every scientists in The Netherlands already ought to know. All we did is apply them to AI. www.nwo.nl/en/netherlan...

‘From combustion engines to tobacco, universities have been used in the past to whitewash now-controversial products. For a long time, the tobacco industry pointed to research it subsidized at universities to claim its products were healthy.’

Do not miss this interview "Safeguarding science from AI” with experts in the field @olivia.science and @irisvanrooij.bsky.social

You're both very talented. Thanks for having us on. 🌈 I made this — and put this video on — to collect as much as I have to say: olivia.science/ai.

This is good advice generally. Given that we now know that there are no significant productivity gains - and that LLMs have evidently hit a wall on reliability, so things are unlikely to improve much - we don't *have* to drink the Kool-Aid.

If you haven't heard this interview with @olivia.science and @irisvanrooij.bsky.social yet, be sure you don't miss it. There's so much good stuff here! www.the-geyser.com/pod-intervie...

I’m glad this blog post is out. Please comment if you can identify with us.