101–110 of 486 posts
So instead of having to train and employ radiologists, we will train and employ radiologists and pay for the AI inference. Excuse me, but how is this beneficial in any way? It's trivially more expensive, and the result has the same quality? And productivity is also the same?
> Some products can reorder radiologist worklists to prioritize critical cases, suggest next steps for care teams, or generate structured draft reports that fit into hospital record systems.
When Tesla demoed (via video) self-driving in 2016 with a claim "The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself" and then when they unveiled Semi in 2017 - I tweeted out and honestly thought that trucking industry is changed forever and it doesn't make sense to be starting in trucking industry. It's almost end of 2025 and either nothing out of it o…
Look at Waymo, not Robotaxi. Waymo is essentially the self driving vision I had as a kid, and ridership is growing exponentially as they expand. It's also very safe if you believe their statistics[0]. I think there's a saying about overestimating stuff in the short term and underestimating stuff in the long term that seems to apply here, though the radiologist narrative was definitely wrong. [0] https://waymo.com/saf…
As I recall, one group had fairly good success, but eventually someone figured out that their data set had images from a low-COVID hospital and a high-COVID hospital, and the lettering on the images used different fonts. The ML model was detecting the font, not the COVID.
[a bit of googling later...]
Here's a link to what I think was the debunking study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-021-00338-7
If you're not at a university, try searching for "AI for radiographic COVID-19 detection selects shortcuts over signal" and you'll probably be able to find an open-access copy.
One thing people aren't talking about is liability. At the end of the day if the radiologist makes an error the radiologist gets sued. If AI replaces the radiologist then it is OpenAI or some other AI company that will get sued each and every time the AI model makes a mistake. No AI company wants to be on the hook for that. So what will happen? Simple. AI will always remain just a tool to assist doctors. But there wi…
>At the end of the day if the radiologist makes an error the radiologist gets sued. Are you sure? Who would want to be a radiologist then when a single false negative could bankrupt you? I think it's more likely that as long as they make a best effort at trying to classify correctly then they would be fine.
Every use of AI has its own problem of "person with 10 fingers" that AI image generation faces and can't seem to solve. For programmers, it's code that calls made up libraries and makes up language semantics. In prose, it's completely incoherent narratives that forget where they are going halfway through. For programmers it's making up case law and citations. Same for scientists, making up authorities and papers and…
> AI art is getting better but still it's very easy for me to quickly distinguish AI result from everything else, because I can visually inspect the artifacts and it's usually not very subtle. I actually disagree in that it's not easy for me at all to quickly distinguish AI images from everything else. But I think we might differ what we mean by "quickly". I can quickly distinguish AI if I am looking. But if I'm mind…
As a related aside, I've started seeing businesses clearly using ChatGPT for their logos. You can tell from the style and how much random detail there is contrasted with the fact that it's a small boba tea shop with two employees. I am still trying to organize my thoughts on that one.
Edit:
Example: https://cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/brookf...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of us have changed opinions after seeing how the tech does not scale. At the time? I would say he was a AI evangelist.
The tech scales, but accessing the training data is a real problem. It's not like scraping the whole internet. And most of it is unlabeled.
When I do write something up, it is usually very finalized at that time; the process of getting to that point is not recorded.
The models maybe need more naturalistic data and more data from working things out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I only came to this thread to say that this is completely untrue: >Human radiologists spend a minority of their time on diagnostics and the majority on other activities, like talking to patients and fellow clinicians. The vast majority of radiologists do nothing other than: come in (or increasingly, stay at home), sit down at a computer, consume a series of medical images while dictating their findings, and then go h…
Agreed, I'm not sure where the OP from TFA is working but around here, radiologists have all been bought out and rolled into Radiology As A Service organizations. They work from home or at an office, never at a clinic, and have zero interactions with the patient. They perform diagnosis on whatever modality is presented and electronically file their work into their EMR. I work with a couple such orgs on remote access…
I think it may be selection bias.
In 2016, Geoffrey Hinton – computer scientist and Turing Award winner – declared that ‘people should stop training radiologists now’. If we had followed every AI evengelist sugestion the world would have collapsed.
People love to bring this up, and it was a silly thing to say -- particularly since he didn't seem to understand that radiologists only spend a small part of their time reading scans. But he said it in the context of a Q&A session that happened to be recorded. Unless you're a skilled politician who can give answers without actually saying anything, you're going to say silly things once in a while in unscripted settin…
If you are rich and care about your health (especially as move past age 40), you probably have use for a physiotherapist, a nutritionist, therapist, regular blood analysis, comprehensive cardio screening, comprehensive cancer screening etc. Arguably, there is no limit to the amount of medical services that people could use if they were cheap and accessible enough.
Even if AI tools add 1-2% on the diagnostic side every year, it will take a very, very long time to catch up to demand.
It's interesting to see people fighting so hard to preserve these jobs. Do people want to work that badly? If a magic wand can do everything radiologists can do, would we embrace it or invent reasons to occupy 40+ hours a week of time anyway? If a magic wand, might be on the horizon, shouldn't we all be fighting to find it and even finding ways to tweak our behaviors to maximize the amount of free time that could be…
