TL;DR: There is an open letter going around to all Dutch universities about the uncritical usage of AI in academia. If you are or know a student/lecturer/PhD in the Netherlands, please send it forward!
You can find the open letter here.
--
Since the rise of GPT 4.0 a few years ago, AI and large language models have been invading every single aspect of daily life. This is done mostly uncritically: we are supposed to accept that it is "the future" and "inevitable", but people don't stop to think if it's even a good idea. This even happens in academica, where entire AI based courses and degrees have shot up from the ground like poisonous mushrooms.
Studies have shown that AI is polluting, often wrong, plagiarising, reduces the ability of people to critically think, and contributes to eugenics and colonisation. It is even being used for political (facist!) ends. I could go on forever.
That is why Dutch academics have come together to write an open letter to all universities of The Netherlands and their executive boards. In the letter, they give good arguments against the use of AI in academia, and demand the universities to
Resist the nonconsensual introduction of AI into software systems;
Ban AI use in classrooms;
Stop the AI hype;
Fortify academic freedom and
Keep critically thinking about AI.
Academia has a responsibility to keep thinking critically and not to simply accept these changes. Not just to the students, but to society as a whole. Because if the universities will not resist, then who will?
As always, our strength lies in numbers. Therefore, I ask every person in Dutch academia to please sign this letter. Whether you are a student, professor, lecturer, PhD candidate or supporting university staff member, your voice counts. You can do so here:
They also made a paper that explores their arguments in great detail, so even if you aren't able to sign the letter I highly recommend checking it out! You can find it on the page of the letter, all the way at the bottom of the page.
The other week, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald published a story uncovering plans for a mega data centre just outside of Melbourne, in the little-known locality of Plumpton.
The 350-hectare hub – the biggest ever publicly proposed in Australia – would need more power than the total output of Victoria’s largest co
[Paywall Free Link]
The data centre is one of many being built in Australia over the coming years, including a fast-tracked centre in the Melbourne suburb of West-Footscray (you may know the area from the warehouse fire in 2018) and another in South Australia being backed by the SA government.
These data centres are privately owned and operated - despite support from state governments. This support has been justified by claims that these data centres will create new local jobs. The Plumpton developers claim that their mega-centre will create 12,000 jobs. In reality, most of the jobs created by data centres come from the construction of them - as many jobs could be created by any large infrastructure project. There are few long-term prospects of employment generated by data centres, as most run with only a small fleet of technicians, especially in relation to the costs of construction and size of the facility.
The other argument being peddled for these data centres is that they will put Victoria (and Australia) in a position to capitalise on the "AI boom". Unfortunately for the 'boomers' out there, it really looks like we're actually in an AI bubble. Basically, the current trend in AI is almost entirely propped up by circular investments and overvaluation of stocks. In other words, it's a tech company circle jerk. Last year, the Australian Financial Review said it was "close to a full Ponzi". As of yet, AI hasn't proved profitable to any of its major investors and developers, excepting Nvidia, who has raked in over $250 billion - and I don't see any state governments pushing for local chip manufacturing. In effect, AI isn't a stable investment for the nation's future.
While there are other major drivers of the demand for more data centres, including increased use of cloud computing, and increasing ordinary daily traffic (everything from posting on Tumblr to e-mailing your union delegate and beyond), AI takes up a significant portion of the capacity. With low estimates suggesting AI currently comprises 20% of data centre usage - jumping up to 40% by 2030, to middling estimates of 40% current usage (USA) going up to 54% by 2030, and high end estimates placing current usage at 50% and climbing to as much as 70% by 2030. All that to say, some growth in number of data centres is to be expected, but really the scale that we're seeing as of late has been down to AI.
The Plumpton data centre has been titled the "Victorian AI hub", entirely dedicated to AI. It is the largest data centre ever proposed in Australia at a maximum demand capacity of 2.4 gigawatts. This exceeds the maximum output capacity of Victoria's largest still-operating coal powerplant, Loy Yang A, at 2.21 gigawatts. Loy Yang A currently produces approximately 30% of the state's energy requirements each year and is the largest single power station in Victoria by output. To look at this in another way, the highest ever recorded demand for electricity in Victoria was 10.57 gigawatts, recorded on the 27th of January, 2026. The data centre alone would use 23% of that, operating at maximum capacity - unlike regular usage data centres, AI data centres regularly operate at or close to maximum capacity.
Flags have already been raised in regards to the impact of data centres on Australia's energy usage. The federal government is aiming for net zero emission by 2050 and 82% renewable energy in grids by 2030. The Victorian state government plans to have a 65% renewable grid by 2030 and 95% renewable by 2035, with the closure of the Loy Yang A coal plant scheduled for that year. The developer of the Plumpton data centre, Syncline Energy, has stated that the energy requirements of the data centre will be supported by gas turbines during peak periods.
The rest of the energy demands, Syncline says, will come from renewables. The location in Plumpton would support this, as just last year, the Melbourne Renewable Energy Hub, started operation on the site next door to the proposed data centre. The MREH is joint operated by the newly reinstated State Electricity Commission and Equis/GreenPoint, a private renewable developer, who bought the project off the original proposer, Syncline Energy, in 2022.
Local impacts:
The MREH, and neighbouring proposed data centre, lies about 2-3km from the Organ Pipes National Park. The Organ Pipes NP is one of the few National Parks that lie close to the Melbourne urban area. Filled with local wildlife - such as kangaroos, wallabies, echidnas, and platypus - and native plants - including 20 rare, threatened, or significant species - it provides an important habitat and sanctuary for native animals. Surveys included in the Victorian Biodiversity Atlas, have shown that the area of the proposed data centre is home to a number of threatened and vulnerable species, including the Tussock Skink, the Striped Legless Lizard, and the Growling Grass Frog. It has been reported that data centres produce a significant amount of noise, with some anecdotal sources suggesting that the hum can be heard from up to 4km from its source. Noise has a significant impact on wildlife, affecting behaviour, reproduction, and species distribution. As much as 55 db during a 24h period can be detrimental to wildlife, but at data centres, which run 24/7, decibels can regularly exceed that, with noise reaching 96 db inside data centres. As most data centres have been constructed near urban areas, more data has been collected on the impacts to human health than on wildlife, and we do not fully know the extent of how the noise, light, and heat produced by a data centre can impact local biodiversity.
The Organ Pipes NP, along with the proposed Plumpton data centre, lies within one of Melbourne's green wedges. These green wedges are specifically designated for agriculture, low impact infrastructure, biodiversity areas, and cultural heritage sites.
That last one is particularly important for the area we're looking at. The Organ Pipes NP is situated alongside the Jacksons Creek/biik wurdha, one of the major tributaries of the Maribyrnong River. From a location on the Maribyrnong now known as Solomon's Ford, in Avondale Heights, up through Brimbank Park, back through the Organ Pipes, and up into Sunbury, is a cultural heritage landscape. This area, sometimes known as the Keilor Plain, was formed by a lava flow millions of years ago. Erosion of these lava flows form "stony rises" - which are important places for the Wurundjeri, and were sites for education and manufacture.
To place this area in it's archaeological context - Sunbury is home to the Sunbury Rings, a Wurundjeri ceremonial site, that has connections to the nearby Jacksons Creek/biik wurdha and to Songlines (spiritual/historical pathways that are both oral traditions and physically embodied in the landscape). All waterways have cultural and spiritual significance to Aboriginal Peoples across Victoria, so the proximity of the rings to the creek is significant, especially as this water system connects multiple cultural places. Also along Jacksons Creek/biik wurdha, the Organ Pipes NP is recognised as a key feature of a cultural landscape, with many cultural deposits noted within the park. At the confluence of the Maribyrnong and Arundel Creek, is a site called Murrup Tamboore, which is a burial place for Ancestral Remains and has a history of occupation dating to at least 30,000 years ago. Just south of Marrup Tamboore are a series of river terraces near Brimbank park where there are numerous occupation and quarry sites, including another known burial site. For the paleontologists, there are also Pleistocene megafauna remains in this area.
Closer to the proposed data centre site, the area directly south of the proposed site, on the other side of the Melton Highway, was surveyed as part of a housing development planning scheme back in 2013/2014. This survey found low density artefact scatters, particularly in low-lying drainage areas. The proposed area for the data centre has a number of drainage channels, which are the headwaters for the Taylors Creek. It should be noted, that while all named waterways have default heritage zoning, unnamed waterways, such as these drainage channels, have no such automatic zoning.
Based on recent VicPlan data, it also looks like there was a CHMP (cultural heritage management plan) undertaken for the MREH. While it will take awhile for these surveys to become public, the VicData map [below] clearly shows a large area that has been registered as one or more Aboriginal Cultural Heritage sites. [Registered Aboriginal Places are marked in dark green]
Now could Syncline Energy pull a Juukan Gorge? No. Victoria has much better heritage protections than WA, all Aboriginal Cultural Heritage is protected, regardless of whether it is registered. However, despite these protections, the way cultural heritage in Victoria is usually protected is site based - not landscape based. This region, currently protected by the green wedge zoning, represents an interconnected heritage landscape. The archaeological, cultural, ecological, and spiritual values of this landscape would likely be disrupted by the construction of a "mega" data centre. Likewise, the values protected by the designation of the Organ Pipes as a National Park would be harmed by a data centre in the area. With impacts to both the wildlife and visitor enjoyment of the space.
So far, I haven't even touched on the topic of water consumption. While there is movement towards the idea of more efficient use of water in data centres, whether the incentive is there for companies, is in question - by far it is both easier and cheaper to not innovate for less water consumption. And, of course, AI data centres consume more water than ordinary data centres. In Australia, and Victoria particularly, we are prone to extended droughts. The last major drought, the millennium drought, lasted from 1996 to 2010, 100 years earlier, the Federation drought lasted from 1895 to 1902.
We are living in a time of climate uncertainty. Where water may become scarce, where severe climate change becomes irreversible if we don't switch to renewables now. AI data centres threaten that with their demand for water and electricity.
Ordinary data centres may be necessary in our current world, but AI isn't. The big AI companies have sunk their investments into this new technology, with no profit outcome on the horizon. In a sunk-cost-fallacy death spiral, these companies are now trying to sell YOU on AI. They want it to become the norm. Part of everyday life. Inescapable. All this so they profit. And with no care for you, the environment, or anything else they destroy along the way.
If I have to end on a call to action, let it be this: stop using AI. Tell your local pollies to stand against AI and AI data centres too. If you want to do more, Algorithm Watch has some tips on resisting data centres on their website.
generative AI is an existential threat to creative spaces. fandom is a community governed space, so it's crucial that we collectively draw a line in the sand about its use. we must not try to distract from the issue at hand by attempting to deflect or dismiss it as an issue of fandom bullying or ship wars. creators must be transparent about AI use and the only way to enforce this is collectively, as a community, if we want to protect the precious creative space that is fandom.
I find it hilarious that people are turning a post that was originally about resisting the use of AI in creative spaces into some kind of hate fueled anti-bullying soap box campaign.
They make multiple posts where they act like they're being vague and don't want to actually call anyone out but then they keep sharing screenshots with usernames in them and they're putting it all in the solavellan/solas critical tags. Meanwhile their posts have nothing to do with Dragon age at all. It's so transparent that they've got personal beef and they can't even see that they're in danger of becoming the kind of bully they claim they're "protecting" the fandom from.
i have been just sitting on the sidelines watching the convoluted tale they are weaving literally day after day after day, and not speaking on it bc everyone except for them wants to move on and, frankly, no one outside of their lil bubble they have cultivated believes a word they are saying, but i have to fully agree with this. bc why are you tagging a harry potter fic post with dragon age related tags? why are you tagging questions about the bg3 fandom with dragon age tags? why are you tagging nonsensical ramblings perpetuating the exact behavior you white knight against with completely unrelated tags?? you just look silly atp.
(if you are as tired of the drama as i am, feel free to literally scroll past. seriously, trust me, i get it. smooches)
to that point and the only other lie (somehow pulled out of thin air) that i will be addressing: i never told this person that if they proved they could simply write on their own that i would take the post down. literally never once said that. what i said (and what was clearly tagged on my callout post) is that if they tagged their fic as ai, then i would take the post down. bc they admitted to using an ai editing software built on genAI. but the five people rallying around this one person seemingly don't know how to read or do any research of their own, i fear.
now, if anyone else is reaching out to this person and saying the post will be taken down if they just prove they can in fact write in the same style and flow as the fic that was called out (not a harry potter fic from two years ago that was beta'd and has nothing to do with the current situation) then i ask that you all to maybe... start thinking critically. who has the authority over my posts? i do. i decide what is proper proof and i decide what constitutes as reason enough for the post to be taken down. i already stated what that would be: just tag your shit accordingly. bc then there would be no need for me to spread awareness about dishonest use of genAI in fandom creative spaces. which again, was the entire point of the post if you would have just taken the time to read it properly. they literally admitted to using the software. they also said they couldn't provide a writing history bc they write.... in grammarly. (google docs, microsoft word, ellipsus, scrivener [bc no one said google docs was the only word-processing program people are allowed to use, it's simply the one they said they export their story to] all have revision history available. i'm sure there are many more, too; these are just the ones i have used and know for a fact have this feature)
and yeah, anon, they plague us with bullying accusations, yet we have all stayed silent aside from continuing to be outspoken about the use of ai in fandom or other harmful stereotypes and untrue narratives they are trying to perpetuate (and my 3? comments from a burner account to defend myself on the reddit callout post of me in a sub they mod that they had previously banned me from in retaliation of speaking out against their dishonest use of ai). they cry witch hunt this and bullying that but... they are the one who won't shut up about me and mine. calling people out by name now?? bc i didn't give them the back and forth beef they wanted?? truly wild (and hilariously sad) to witness.
i've said it once (twice, thrice, whatever) before but i do truly mean it this time because i have been having a blast not focusing on the trainwreck of lie after lie after wacky fucking lie that they are building up, but this is the last thing i will say on the matter. truly (i promise guys). if you hear of anything else, i implore you to realize this person has perpetuated this behavior in two (three if you want to get nitty gritty with it) completely unrelated and separate dragon age fandom spaces. there is a pattern here. anyways!!!!!!!!! have a wonderful week and go smoosh ur rooks with solas and play barbies fr <3
