Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 152 posts

Re: Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

#11

Post by eWeSaYYY »

userbinator wrote: post #7
djoldman wrote: post #4

> Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) rejected your resume before a human even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a machine you can’t question. I wonder when/if the opposite will be as much of an article hook: "Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that a human rejected your resume before an algorithm pow…

Humans can be held accountable. Machines can't. AI dilutes responsibility.

[dead]

Re: Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

#12

Post by linsomniac »

djoldman wrote: post #4

> Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) rejected your resume before a human even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a machine you can’t question. I wonder when/if the opposite will be as much of an article hook: "Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that a human rejected your resume before an algorithm pow…

>Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a human you can’t question

That really struck a chord with me. I've been struggling with chronic sinusitis, without really much success. I had ChatGPT o3 do a deep research on my specific symptoms and test results, including a negative allergy (on my shoulder) test but that the doctor observed allergic reactions in my sinuses.

ChatGPT seemed to do a great job, and in particular came up with a pointer to an NIH reference that showed 25% of patients in a study showed "local rhinitis" (isolated allergic reactions) in their sinuses that didn't show elsewhere. I asked my ENT if I could be experiencing a local reaction in my sinuses that didn't show up in my shoulder, and he completely dismissed that idea with "That's not how allergies work, they cause a reaction all over the body."

However, I will say that I've been taking one of the second gen allergy meds for the last 2 weeks and the sinus issues have been resolved and staying resolved, but I do need another couple months to really have a good data point.

The funny thing is that this Dr is a evening programmer, and every time I see him we are talking about how amazing the different LLMs are for programming. He also really seems to keep up with new ENT tech, he was telling me all about a new "KPAP" algorithm that they are working on FDA approval for and apparently is much less annoying to use than CPAP. But he didn't have any interest in looking at the at the NIH reference.

Re: Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

#13

Post by andrewmutz »

userbinator wrote: post #7
djoldman wrote: post #4

> Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) rejected your resume before a human even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a machine you can’t question. I wonder when/if the opposite will be as much of an article hook: "Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that a human rejected your resume before an algorithm pow…

Humans can be held accountable. Machines can't. AI dilutes responsibility.

What do you mean held accountable? No HR human is going to jail for overlooking your resume.

If you mean that a human can be fired when they overlook a resume, an AI system can be be similarly rejected and no longer used.

Re: Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

#14

Post by linsomniac »

leereeves wrote: post #6
djoldman wrote: post #4

> Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) rejected your resume before a human even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a machine you can’t question. I wonder when/if the opposite will be as much of an article hook: "Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that a human rejected your resume before an algorithm pow…

> In the second, I don't understand as no competent licensed doctor chooses the treatment options (absent an emergency); they presumably know the only reasonable options, discuss them with the patient, answer questions, and the patient chooses. I wish that were the case, but in my experience it is not. Every time I've seen a doctor, they offered only one medication, unless I requested a different one.

>they offered only one medication

I've had a few doctors offer me alternatives and talk through the options, which I'll agree is rare. It sure has been nice when it happened. One time I did push back on one of the doctor's recommendations: I was with my mom and the doctor said he was going to prescribe some medication. I said "I presume you're already aware of this but she's been on that before and reacted poorly to it and we took her off it because of that. The doctor was NOT aware of that and prescribed something else. I sure was glad to be there and be able to catch that.

Re: Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

#15

Post by mistrial9 »

leereeves wrote: post #3
lacker wrote: post #2

I think most people who want to "opt out of AI" don't actually understand where AI is used. Every Google search uses AI, even the ones that don't show an "AI panel" at the top. Every iOS spellcheck uses AI. Every time you send an email or make a non-cryptocurrency electronic payment, you're relying on an AI that verifies that your transaction is legitimate. I imagine the author would respond, "That's not what I mean!…

I imagine the author would respond: "That's what I said" "Opting out of AI is no simple matter. AI powers essential systems such as healthcare, transport and finance. It also influences hiring decisions, rental applications, loans, credit scoring, social media feeds, government services and even what news or information we see when we search online."

tech people often refer to politicians as somehow dumb, but big AI safety legislation two years ago on both sides of the North Atlantic, deeply dives into exactly this as "safety" for the general public.

Re: Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

#16

Post by Robotbeat »

leereeves wrote: post #3
lacker wrote: post #2

I think most people who want to "opt out of AI" don't actually understand where AI is used. Every Google search uses AI, even the ones that don't show an "AI panel" at the top. Every iOS spellcheck uses AI. Every time you send an email or make a non-cryptocurrency electronic payment, you're relying on an AI that verifies that your transaction is legitimate. I imagine the author would respond, "That's not what I mean!…

I imagine the author would respond: "That's what I said" "Opting out of AI is no simple matter. AI powers essential systems such as healthcare, transport and finance. It also influences hiring decisions, rental applications, loans, credit scoring, social media feeds, government services and even what news or information we see when we search online."

Okay, then I guess they’ll agree to paying more for those services since they’ll cost more to deal with someone’s boutique Amistics.

Re: Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

#18

Post by drivingmenuts »

andrewmutz wrote: post #13
userbinator wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humans can be held accountable. Machines can't. AI dilutes responsibility.

What do you mean held accountable? No HR human is going to jail for overlooking your resume. If you mean that a human can be fired when they overlook a resume, an AI system can be be similarly rejected and no longer used.

You cannot punish an AI - it has no sense of ethics or morality, nor a conscience. An AI cannot be made to feel shame. You cannot punish an AI for transgressing.

A person can be held responsible, even when it's indirect responsibility, in a way that serves as a warning to others, to avoid certain behaviors.

It just seems wrong to allow machines to make decisions affecting humans, when those machines are incapable of experiencing the the world as a human being does. And yet, people are eager to offload the responsibility onto machines, to escape responsibility themselves.

Re: Avoiding AI is hard – but our freedom to opt out must be protected

#20

Post by zdragnar »

leereeves wrote: post #6
djoldman wrote: post #4

> Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) rejected your resume before a human even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a machine you can’t question. I wonder when/if the opposite will be as much of an article hook: "Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that a human rejected your resume before an algorithm pow…

> In the second, I don't understand as no competent licensed doctor chooses the treatment options (absent an emergency); they presumably know the only reasonable options, discuss them with the patient, answer questions, and the patient chooses. I wish that were the case, but in my experience it is not. Every time I've seen a doctor, they offered only one medication, unless I requested a different one.

There's a few possible reasons this can happen.

First is that the side effect profile of one option is much better known or tolerated, so the doctor will default to it.

Second is that the doctor knows the insurance company / government plan will require attempting to treat a condition with a standard cheaper treatment before they will pay for the newer, more expensive option.

There's always the third case where the doctor is overworked, lazy or prideful and doesn't consider the patient may have some input on which treatment they would like, since they didn't go to medical school and what would they know anyway?

Post reply on HN