61–70 of 253 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have to verify then there is no trust. That's not how trust works. I never liked the phrase.
I agree. I've never liked the phrase either. Even so, I'll take "Trust but verify" as a shorthand for "Accept the output of a somewhat untrustworthy person/process, but verify the output before making use of it." Sometimes a short, inaccurate phrase wins out over the longer, accurate version.
> Satisfying HIPAA rules around patient privacy alone may take many years, or decades, to resolve themselves before we could even contemplate directly using programs like ChatGPT in a medical theater. This is easily solved by not using someone else's API. Here's $500 worth of hardware you can get on ebay running Vicuna-13B, locally: > IV fluids may not be the best treatment for someone with severe pulmonary edema and…
You really, really don't want to use inferior models where accuracy is a life or death issue.
This really feels farcical, and kind of like vc bros hyping up a product. Considering this was a serious issue of life and death of a patient, it was surprising how it read like a prank or like the scene from Harold and Kumar, where Kumar plays a fake doctor and saves an ER patient through sheer luck. I know some doctors are full of baloney but c'mon. I really hope maybe that we create better doctors that have a lot…
This is no different than asking chatgpt to draft code that I could otherwise write from scratch. It's like having an assistant.
Who is surprised that in a match between a doctor's bedside manner and a machine's that a machine wins? The cold metal of a machine is nothing next to the coldness of a doctor's heart! ;)
> ...only if you feed it perfect information, and the actual patient has a classic presentation, which is rarely the case. (And you don’t mind a 50% success rate that often misses life-threatening conditions.) This sounds like a step backwards?
It isn't a doctor, it's trained on Reddit threads and other random shit off the internet not medical journals.
This really feels farcical, and kind of like vc bros hyping up a product. Considering this was a serious issue of life and death of a patient, it was surprising how it read like a prank or like the scene from Harold and Kumar, where Kumar plays a fake doctor and saves an ER patient through sheer luck. I know some doctors are full of baloney but c'mon. I really hope maybe that we create better doctors that have a lot…
ChatGPT is excellent at writing "fluffy" pieces full of empathy, compassion, PR talk, politician speech, and any other wordy flavor you need.
As an engineer who is unable to produce such writing, this tool is quite helpful!
This really feels farcical, and kind of like vc bros hyping up a product. Considering this was a serious issue of life and death of a patient, it was surprising how it read like a prank or like the scene from Harold and Kumar, where Kumar plays a fake doctor and saves an ER patient through sheer luck. I know some doctors are full of baloney but c'mon. I really hope maybe that we create better doctors that have a lot…
I believe it. I've used chatgpt for inspiration on how to craft difficult messages with empathy. I've been managing people for a long time and could've done it independently, but it's good to get help. It can be tough to express empathy when exhausted after a long day of urgent demands and responsibilities. This is no different than asking chatgpt to draft code that I could otherwise write from scratch. It's like hav…
Kind of fascinating that the benefit here is not so much artificial intelligence as artificial empathy.
In their book "The Elephant in the Brain", Kevin Simler and Robin Hanson argue that a large subset of health care is already something like that: conspicuous caring with little benefits other than social signaling and feeling that one's being care for. [1]
[1]: https://johnathanbi.com/book-notes-summaries/notes-on-elepha...