Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care • Hacker News Board

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#101

Post by Contexti » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 10:35 AM UTC

afiori wrote: post #90

tchvil wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see it frequently here... I suppose it comes from French. Viola means rape(il la viola) or break the law(il viola la loi). The real one is voilà! And dropping the accent, is apparently acceptable in English. Voila! ;)

> il Are you mixing French and Italian articles? As an addendum wiktionary[0] is always useful when searching other meanings of a word [0] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/viola

il is a pronoun[0] in French.

I haven't learned French since high school, but here's how I would translate the examples:

il la viola "He raped her"

il viola la loi "He broke the law"

[0](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/il#French)

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#102

Post by suture » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 10:49 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #100

suture wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The naivety is in thinking that if it doesn’t work in Canada then it must not be a solved problem. The naivety is in thinking that if you can find anecdotal evidence that in a particular instance Canada’s system worked worse than the U.S. system then it must be the case that Canada’s system is worse. The U.S. per capita spends far more on healthcare than any other OECD country. We don’t get correspondingly better out…

Sir, this is a Wendy’s. I’m not sure how your reply has anything to do with what I said. “Better than the US” is not some hurdle that makes a problem “solved”. Canada is likely better at snow removal but that doesn’t make it a “solved problem”.

It’s a solved problem as far as one can get given the constraints involved. As I said, if you don’t want to use that phrase then don’t. I’m not going to quibble over semantics. Human societies are far more complex than programming and the notion of “solved” means something different in the former than in the latter. Use whatever phrase you want. Just don’t think the U.S. system is in any way better. You are the one who brought up an anecdotal experience in favor of the U.S. system over Canada’s system.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#103

Post by suture » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 10:58 AM UTC

Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote: post #97

suture wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming by free you mean universal coverage that is (almost) free at the point of usage then this is a solved problem. What the United States lacks in order to realize a solution is political willpower and an electorate that is savvy enough to know that wanting such a system does not make one a communist. (And that being a communist does not make one an evil person.)

Being a communist absolutely makes you an evil person. About 5 times more evil than the group of people they fought against in a war. As for socialized medicine it makes doctors another arm of the government. In the UK last week (or the week before) one arm of the government ordered another arm of the government to kill a 9 year old. We are also just outside a 2 year stretch of tyranny of governments all over the wor…

I hope you can break from the the intellectual shackles that bind you. I hope you can visit other countries and read from sources of information outside your comfort zone. Subscribing to a belief about which system of economics you prefer does not make one evil.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#104

Post by refurb » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 11:08 AM UTC

suture wrote: post #102

refurb wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sir, this is a Wendy’s. I’m not sure how your reply has anything to do with what I said. “Better than the US” is not some hurdle that makes a problem “solved”. Canada is likely better at snow removal but that doesn’t make it a “solved problem”.

It’s a solved problem as far as one can get given the constraints involved. As I said, if you don’t want to use that phrase then don’t. I’m not going to quibble over semantics. Human societies are far more complex than programming and the notion of “solved” means something different in the former than in the latter. Use whatever phrase you want. Just don’t think the U.S. system is in any way better. You are the one w…

You keep talking about the US, but as a former resident of Canada I know that’s the country’s favorite measuring stick. “We’re not as bad as the US so stop complaining” is the favorite ring of politicians.

Doesn’t do much for the people disabled from pain on a 3 year wait list for a hip transplant or my buddy’s cousin’s kid who doesn’t get access to the standard of care of CF.

It’s not solved in the least, every country struggles, so using the word “solved” is, as I said, naive.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#105

Post by Rygian » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 11:08 AM UTC

thisgoodlife wrote: post #95

Rygian wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy to imagine: patient records will now include ads for expensive drugs. Doctors can make $ on the side by referring patients to Google Pharma. Drug labs can dig a moat around their products by buying ad placements in doctors' digital prescription pads.

I’m all for it if it means free health care.

No, you keep paying the same or more.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#106

Post by the_d3f4ult » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 11:20 AM UTC

jholman wrote: post #73

systemvoltage wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced, even with the best of intentions. In fact, I am convinced of the opposite: A) Universal Health program would result in terrible quality health care B) It would lead to longer wait times, and less choices C) It would be insanely costly to fund. We've been busy printing a lot of $. Increased the Federal deficit from $21T to $30 since COVID and there isn't a good way to fund a bloated system in USA, c…

Regarding (A) and (C), this is the obligatory reminder that: * The US spends more public money on health care, per capita, than other wealthy nations, while also spending much much more private money than other wealthy nations * By many measures, the US gets worse outcomes (e.g. life expectancy) The conclusion that many draw from this is that perhaps a single-payer health care system in the US could dramatically lowe…

> US doctors seemed really eager to waste money, like really eager, like it was creepy

Your last point is purely a function of the liability culture in the states. US physicians are quite aware of what's appropriate and what's inappropriate testing wise. However, as long as a physician can be held personally liable for any oversight - meaning that the results of an entire career can be lost - they're going to over-test.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#107

Post by suture » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 11:27 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #104

suture wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a solved problem as far as one can get given the constraints involved. As I said, if you don’t want to use that phrase then don’t. I’m not going to quibble over semantics. Human societies are far more complex than programming and the notion of “solved” means something different in the former than in the latter. Use whatever phrase you want. Just don’t think the U.S. system is in any way better. You are the one w…

You keep talking about the US, but as a former resident of Canada I know that’s the country’s favorite measuring stick. “We’re not as bad as the US so stop complaining” is the favorite ring of politicians. Doesn’t do much for the people disabled from pain on a 3 year wait list for a hip transplant or my buddy’s cousin’s kid who doesn’t get access to the standard of care of CF. It’s not solved in the least, every coun…

Perhaps you don’t understand how words work. Words can have different meanings/connotations depending on situation and context. As I said repeatedly, for me it is correct to say “solved” given the constraints involved. Human societies are complex and one can nitpick the world “solved” and say nothing is solved when it come policies of complex societies. So don’t use that word when it comes to societal issues. I and many others do use that word for certain issues. It’s naive of you to have your pedantic nitpicking on the word and not reflect on what it says about you. Obviously I keep bringing up the U.S. because that’s the context of my starting comment way above. And you yourself have brought up the U.S.

What goal do you wish to accomplish your pedantic nitpicking? You want to get others to believe that my views on national health policies are naive? You want me to realize that in a strict, mathematical sense of the word saying “solved” is incorrect? These are rhetorical questions because I’m not going to read your response. You clearly don’t know much about policy issues and what it means for a society have essentially “solved” an issue (or have found a decent enough solution that it isn’t a dire problem anymore so that some non pedantic people will say it is solved).

Carry forth Don Quixote on your quest to eradicate incorrect usage of what you think “solved” means.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#108

Post by refurb » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 11:31 AM UTC

suture wrote: post #107

refurb wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You keep talking about the US, but as a former resident of Canada I know that’s the country’s favorite measuring stick. “We’re not as bad as the US so stop complaining” is the favorite ring of politicians. Doesn’t do much for the people disabled from pain on a 3 year wait list for a hip transplant or my buddy’s cousin’s kid who doesn’t get access to the standard of care of CF. It’s not solved in the least, every coun…

Perhaps you don’t understand how words work. Words can have different meanings/connotations depending on situation and context. As I said repeatedly, for me it is correct to say “solved” given the constraints involved. Human societies are complex and one can nitpick the world “solved” and say nothing is solved when it come policies of complex societies. So don’t use that word when it comes to societal issues. I and m…

Words have meaning and we should encourage people to use the right ones.

You claim I don’t know policy without knowing healthcare policy is my day job.

Even given the benefit of the doubt that as an outsider looking in you think it’s solved, but as someone who is elbow deep in it everyday “solved” just sounds naive.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#109

Post by the_d3f4ult » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 11:39 AM UTC

0xy wrote: post #17

thatfrenchguy wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not getting cheaper healthcare by using more machine learning, it's a hard problem for a reason.

It's a hard problem because the real problem is convincing a brain surgeon making $450,000 a year that he should be partially or wholly replaced with AI models. It's the same reason costs to build subway tunnels has dramatically increased in NYC, labor unions have the process by the throat and will accept not even a cent in reduced labor costs, even when improvements would improve safety or efficiency.

I am not aware of any AI model or technology that functions as anything beyond a toy in the healthcare space. There's very little utility to labelling things in healthcare - even in fields like ophthalmology, dermatology or radiology where companies have made some advances. Humans already do it very well and it's about 1% of the actual battle. Show me an AI that that can make a diagnosis, counsel a patient's family emergently, take the patient to surgery and do a craniotomy then nurse the patient for weeks in the neuro-ICU and I'll be super impressed.

Moreover, it's the patient, not the neurosurgeon that has to make the decision to trust the AI.

Re: Alphabet is spending billions to become a force in health care

#110

Post by bluedino » Wed, Jun 22, 2022, 11:52 AM UTC

jholman wrote: post #73

systemvoltage wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced, even with the best of intentions. In fact, I am convinced of the opposite: A) Universal Health program would result in terrible quality health care B) It would lead to longer wait times, and less choices C) It would be insanely costly to fund. We've been busy printing a lot of $. Increased the Federal deficit from $21T to $30 since COVID and there isn't a good way to fund a bloated system in USA, c…

Regarding (A) and (C), this is the obligatory reminder that: * The US spends more public money on health care, per capita, than other wealthy nations, while also spending much much more private money than other wealthy nations * By many measures, the US gets worse outcomes (e.g. life expectancy) The conclusion that many draw from this is that perhaps a single-payer health care system in the US could dramatically lowe…

Maybe because the 2/3rds of the population is overweight or obese. It's like the education system in the US, you can spend all the money you want but if the participants aren't actively trying to improve...