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

591–600 of 927 posts

Re: Midjourney Medical

#591

Post by dd36 »

GTP wrote: post #575
aeonik wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't we do full body scans, learn about these "quirks", and document them in the wider science literature? I understand there are many benign tumors that doctors prefer to ignore in people, but eventually when scanning becomes portable and safe enough having regular access to scans could really help a lot of conditions.

I think we may be looking at a very large, if not potentially infinite, set of quirks. And there's the risk of worrying people for nothing. So, if this is the plan, at the very least, it should take the form of a large medical study and not a shiny machine for fancy spas.

Isn’t that a similar argument against AI?

Re: Midjourney Medical

#592

Post by bondarchuk »

GTP wrote: post #560

I find the technology side intriguing and worth a deeper dive. But I'm not convinced about their view of having people casually going to a spa every week and getting a full body scan. AFAIK, some doctors tend to avoid full-body scans. The reason is that each body is different and has its own quirks. If you do a scan for no reason other than "I can do it fast", chances are that the scan will show something unusual. Bu…

I know you are right but it just sounds so dumb. In theory it should be possible to do a scan and then realize most things you find are likely not a problem and don't worry about them.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#593

Post by andrerath »

GTP wrote: post #560

I find the technology side intriguing and worth a deeper dive. But I'm not convinced about their view of having people casually going to a spa every week and getting a full body scan. AFAIK, some doctors tend to avoid full-body scans. The reason is that each body is different and has its own quirks. If you do a scan for no reason other than "I can do it fast", chances are that the scan will show something unusual. Bu…

SOTA ultrasound devices are still very expensive, with e.g. a custom 3D probe with a few hundred piezo elements costing well over 10k. IF they want to use MEMS probe instead of piezo (which is implied by them saying that they will use a chirp), that's going to be even more expensive, considering the lack of manufacturing know-how. When sufficiently scaled, I wouldn't say it is an exorbitant price for large research hospitals, but I am a little skeptical of rolling these out as a health checkup "spa" service outside of areas with extreme wealth concentration (e.g., Silicon Valley? Sure. London? Yeah; Minneapolis? not so sure.)

Re: Midjourney Medical

#594

Post by sobiolite »

tmhrtly wrote: post #571

> You want as much data as you can get about your health as quickly and as cheaply as possible. In other words, you want a technology optimized for getting as many “megabytes per second per dollar” of information about your body. This is so far from my vision of what I want from healthcare. I want a healthcare system that is optimised around A) proactively keeping me healthy, and B) reactively helping get back to hea…

Aren't they serving the same thing? Proactively and reactively keeping you healthy requires understanding your body, both the baseline of how it functions when you're healthy, and how it functions when you're not.

Right now we're often in a situation where the only data you have is expensive tests ran when you're sick enough to justify them, when it may already be too late.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#595

Post by x187463 »

fastasucan wrote: post #586
aeonik wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't we do full body scans, learn about these "quirks", and document them in the wider science literature? I understand there are many benign tumors that doctors prefer to ignore in people, but eventually when scanning becomes portable and safe enough having regular access to scans could really help a lot of conditions.

Because if a "condition" doesn't impact you, will it help to be aware of it? Over treatment can be a real problem. You dont want to take medisine you dont need, or spend much time in a hospital if there is no net positive outcome.

> Because if a "condition" doesn't impact you, will it help to be aware of it?

Fast and cheap full body scans could provide the data necessary to tune out the noise.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#596

Post by aeonik »

fastasucan wrote: post #586
aeonik wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't we do full body scans, learn about these "quirks", and document them in the wider science literature? I understand there are many benign tumors that doctors prefer to ignore in people, but eventually when scanning becomes portable and safe enough having regular access to scans could really help a lot of conditions.

Because if a "condition" doesn't impact you, will it help to be aware of it? Over treatment can be a real problem. You dont want to take medisine you dont need, or spend much time in a hospital if there is no net positive outcome.

For me?

If I could have daily full 3d body scans, and time lapse healing, track injury progress, visualize and correlate food and exercise.

And all I have to do is chill out about known benign cysts and tumors.

Yes I think it will help. I would take that trade off.

I already can feel a few cysts that have been with me for a long time, docs said I was fine, so I've already been through the stressful initiation of benign lumps.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#597

Post by hermannj314 »

You don't need to build a perfect med spa, you only need to control the patents of the key pieces of a med spa.

This is nothing more thab a prophylactic patent grab to stifle competition and progress in this space for the next decade and/or hoover up patient data behind a paywall where they will gladly lease the weights and bias cure to you own disease back to you in the form of a subscription.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#598

Post by tclancy »

keiferski wrote: post #348

I have a mixed response: 1. It kind of makes sense that an AI imagery company would apply that to other novel applications of imagery and computing and try to do something cool with it. 2. Midjourney as a brand is all over the place and this feels - off , somehow. I think from a branding pov they should have just started a different company with a different name. Perhaps a single image-focused umbrella company named…

“To the man with a new hammer, all problems look like a nail.”

Re: Midjourney Medical

#600

Post by klabb3 »

altmanaltman wrote: post #529
leothetechguy wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

to be fair I wouldn't call people operating AI Image generators creative people. At best they're people curious about the technology itself, anybody willing to learn and do it for the sake of being creative does it themselves.

I think you're romanticizing art generation a bit. A lot of it operates like a normal working job, there is no magic "truly creative genuis", a lot of working artists treat it as their jobs and if a tool helps them get their job done, it is helpful. Not every creative profession is something where you create something you're proud of or you own. You're often just one part of a massive machine working on a project. It…

Both ”creative mythical noble artist” and ”creative work is just work” are unhelpful strawman arguments. One is elitist, the other is reductionist.

Creativity is neither a property of who you are or what you do. It’s about how you do it. It’s closer to a mindset of curiosity, wonder and play. For example, many programmers have a need for creativity within coding, but don’t feel they get it at their 9-5 job, and instead work a side project (like FOSS, indie game) because it’s a more creative experience. The point is: same person, same activity yet one is more creative than the other.

The art/artifact itself is not creative. It’s the process that’s creative. Building a car can be creative. Buying a car is not. That’s not romanticizing and gatekeeping people who don’t have time to build a car. It would be genuinely misleading to equate those things.

Post reply on HN