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

Midjourney Medical

midjourney.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 927 posts

Re: Midjourney Medical

#181

Post by Jtsummers »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #118
maz1b wrote: post #90

I had to check the date after seeing the headline, and again after opening the page. Thought it was April Fools. Regardless, as a doctor and full stack engineer, I'm looking forward to learning more about their methodologies, their approaches, but I don't think this is going to be displacing MRIs or remotely close, based off the cursory initial glance. If their vision is to be able to provide end users with more acti…

[flagged]

> they have no hope for commercialization.

Remember, commercialization isn't the goal. They don't need to make a profit, as a company, they just need to get people to invest in their company and not get charged with fraud for something along the way.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#182

Post by swyx »

themantalope wrote: post #34

radiologist here - example images don't look great

can you say more? dont look great compared to current radiology, sure, but you see no potential in ultrasound diagnosis whatsoever? would it improving 10% change your mind? 10x? what's a good way to think about what "looks good" looks like?

Re: Midjourney Medical

#183

Post by Barrin92 »

nihonde wrote: post #155
Barrin92 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because it has negative effects. Over scanning leads to, in particular with the economic incentives of the healthcare system at large not to mention a company like this, over-treatment. It's one of the reasons countries have scaled back mammograms because women have been forced into surgery and treatment with no meaningful improvement in outcomes. Prostate cancer being another one. My wife's a cardiologist and hypoch…

Rather than dealing with the issue—hypochondriacs or whatever—you prefer to remove the option for the non-hypochondriacs? The fact that doctors like your wife think that people who are concerned about their health and want more information is a problem tells me everything I need to know about your (and her) worldview. You've dressed it up as being pragmatic, but the reality is that you're arguing for censorship and a…

>that people who are concerned about their health and want more information is a problem

It is a problem because there's evidence based standards for when examinations are indicated and prolong or improve a person's life. You being extremely concerned doesn't move that needle and subjecting you to tests simply because you're anxious is blatantly unethical and harmful to your psychological wellbeing.

And nope this isn't censorship, it's being mathematically literate and understanding how data production works. Here's an actual real world example. There are aids tests that are 99% accurate. About 30 in 1000 people in the US have AIDS. 99/1 is great odds, let's test everyone, data doesn't hurt right? Except as it turns out if you test a thousand people randomly you'll have 10 false positives and 3 people with AIDS, Bayes in action.

So if you sent every American through body scanners, which are less reliable than that test btw, you'd have quite literally millions of people in follow up procedures for diseases they do not have with their mental health ruined and the system ground to a halt, because producing information is not always the right thing to do.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#184

Post by fatata123 »

sberens wrote: post #127
EduardLev wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

great, just confirm you also have >>$200MM revenue[0] and have also previously founded a hard tech startup! [0] https://www.theinformation.com/briefings/midjourney-revenue-...

If that’s your thinking, I’m sorry but you’re just a sucker.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#185

Post by danpalmer »

Jtsummers wrote: post #144
danpalmer wrote: post #15

The scans take 60 seconds, but at their stated numbers each machine would need to do a scan every 30 seconds 24/7. At this point I stopped reading because I don't have time to parse slop.

Well, the math is the other way. If you assume a 30 day month, you have 2,592,000 seconds each month to perform scans in. With 1,000,000,000 target scans and 50,000 machines, that's 20,000 scans per month per machine. 2,592,000 seconds / 20,000 scans = 129.6 seconds/scan If you really hate your customers and don't care about cleaning out the tanks between scans, you could make this work. They have to be either able b…

Apologies, must have got the maths wrong somewhere in the middle, but anyone who has ever had a medical scan will know that 2 minutes is laughable.

Realistically, a 60 second scan is going to take ~10 mins minimum, and will operate 8 hours a day, let's say charitably 7 days a week. Assume 50% utilisation due to staffing, repair, holidays, etc, we're looking at ~36m a month, or 0.036% of what is being pitched here. (8hrs * 6 scans * 30 days * 0.5 utilisation * 50k machines).

Re: Midjourney Medical

#186

Post by datadrivenangel »

carlosdp wrote: post #165
unholiness wrote: post #119

So, on the one hand, this is interesting! Reducing radiation from CT scans is a noble cause on its own. If on top of that it could make tomography cheaper and easier, you could imagine getting earlier detection of aneurisms, fibrosis, cirrhosis, thrombosis, stenosis, even plausibly cancerous masses (along with plenty of over-detection). On the other hand, nothing here substantiates this promise. We've got a video ren…

that's not a video render of a hypothetical device, that's a real video of the real working device, fwiw

It's just a render? Where's the video?

Re: Midjourney Medical

#188

Post by dwd »

That video gave me ESB Han Solo carbon freeze vibes. Not sure if that was the stylistic intent they were going for. I guess there's a good chance those who worked on the video weren't even born when it was released.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#189

Post by concrete_head »

themantalope wrote: post #92
robertclaus wrote: post #83

Isn't this how MRIs and stuff already work, they just use waves with much more appropriate wavelengths...?

MRI uses EM radiation in the radiowave frequency band. This is using sound.

And doesn't bone pretty much block all ultrasound waves? There is a time and place for ultrasound, just like there is for MRI or Xray.

So im curious to know the limitations of this device

Re: Midjourney Medical

#190

Post by Jtsummers »

danpalmer wrote: post #185
Jtsummers wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the math is the other way. If you assume a 30 day month, you have 2,592,000 seconds each month to perform scans in. With 1,000,000,000 target scans and 50,000 machines, that's 20,000 scans per month per machine. 2,592,000 seconds / 20,000 scans = 129.6 seconds/scan If you really hate your customers and don't care about cleaning out the tanks between scans, you could make this work. They have to be either able b…

Apologies, must have got the maths wrong somewhere in the middle, but anyone who has ever had a medical scan will know that 2 minutes is laughable. Realistically, a 60 second scan is going to take ~10 mins minimum, and will operate 8 hours a day, let's say charitably 7 days a week. Assume 50% utilisation due to staffing, repair, holidays, etc, we're looking at ~36m a month, or 0.036% of what is being pitched here. (8…

Yep, and with full body submersion, they'll need to change out that water regularly. And people think data centers waste water, Midjourney says, "Hold my beer."
Post reply on HN