Live data from Hacker News

Midjourney Medical

midjourney.com

801–810 of 927 posts

Re: Midjourney Medical

#802
post #65

I don't understand how people can hate on this. It's probably the most novel & ambitious consumer health device ever? Plus they're doing it fully bootstrapped. Let them cook!

How old are you? I've been conned all my life by tech companies selling us "deliverance from work", "permanent Mars bases", "asteroid mining", "AR/VR everywhere, for everyone, all the time", "crypto will replace money", "3d TVs are the new hot shit", "self driving cars for everyone in 2 years tops" I don't understand how people are so gullible? How do they keep falling for it?

Yeah - this is the truth. I roll my eyes at nearly every "technology breakthrough" headline I see, and specially those involving medical technology. It almost never turns out to be true. Just last week, there were two separate cures for cancer that hit the HN front page. All hype and bullshit, of course. This piece from Midjourney starts off with patients wading into a "golden pool of light". If that doesn't set off your bullshit detector, I don't know what will. This is not how serious people talk about serious medical advances.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#803
post #768

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah, I'm neither a bot nor written with any help from an LLM, but I'll take the fact that you can't tell the difference as a compliment :)

It's not meant as a slight against you, but an observation on people blindly trusting Internet commenters in a time where our trust is (or should be?) at an all-time low for such content, so we should check our priors to ensure what we're consuming can be trusted and is verifiably true as LLMs exude confidently incorrect behavior.

Not taken negatively, and you're right. This is even more difficult with things that are opinion, and not clearly verifiable.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#804
post #788

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you need the math typed out?

In order for 50k scanners to perform 1 billion scans in a month, they need to be run nearly 24/7. It will require (in a 30 day month) an average of 129.6 seconds per scan, including both the 60 second scan time and moving people on and off the scanner surface. You get just over a minute to move someone off, clean the system, and get the next person onto the platform. If you neglect cleaning the system, and everyone i…

[deleted]

Re: Midjourney Medical

#805
At the surface level, this sounds very similar to Theranos's mission: create a non-invasive testing method that replace traditionally invasive/costly testing methods so successfully that it becomes silly not to gather and sample as much of your health data as possible, in the hopes that more data will eventually translate to better diagnostics.

Of course Theranos failed because they faked the testing tech (and allegedly also the test results) during their failed journey in developing their novel testing tech. Ostensibly, Midjourney is not going down that path, but I wonder why Midjourney thinks its brand is valuable when introducing this product? Because if someone were to accuse Midjourney of being the next Theranos, then Midjourney's fame for a AI-image generation service would slot in perfectly with a grift selling miraculously cheap body imaging tech.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#806
post #736
post #726

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Incidentalomas" or unexpected, probably benign, findings are annoying to physicians For a lot of these things I wonder why they don't just do multiple scans just to see how things develop. Is it a cost issue?

That's generally exactly what we do, which if we need to follow 2x or 10x incidental lesions in the population, leads to cost and availability problems. A lymphoma patient in remission needs follow up scans too, and I don't want them to have to wait 3 months because thousands of people are now following up their benign adrenal adenomas.

If you could dramatically reduce cost and improve availability, would this still be a problem?

What's the limiting factor that prevents medical imaging from getting cheaper and more available?

Re: Midjourney Medical

#807
post #788

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you need the math typed out?

In order for 50k scanners to perform 1 billion scans in a month, they need to be run nearly 24/7. It will require (in a 30 day month) an average of 129.6 seconds per scan, including both the 60 second scan time and moving people on and off the scanner surface. You get just over a minute to move someone off, clean the system, and get the next person onto the platform. If you neglect cleaning the system, and everyone i…

My comment was "if every hospital had one" rather than "if 50k hospitals had one" but either way, the math gets to the order of magnitude stated. Nitpicking how much buffer they gave themselves for cleaning doesn't disprove the math - the target is years away, and solving a trivial gap is just a matter of speeding up the scan or putting multiple people in.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#808
How much is a scan going to cost? The video motions petabyte per scan? These types are scans (medical images) are extremely dense and large in size, storing short or long term images sounds like its going to be extremely expensive when combined with AI analysis, etc. Not to Mention the cost of operating a Spa is not cheap, especially if your buying real estate, and the cost of the machine itself.

Is this a dystopian Spa, where full scans cost 50k, and basic ones are 1-5k?

Re: Midjourney Medical

#810
post #768

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah, I'm neither a bot nor written with any help from an LLM, but I'll take the fact that you can't tell the difference as a compliment :)

It's not meant as a slight against you, but an observation on people blindly trusting Internet commenters in a time where our trust is (or should be?) at an all-time low for such content, so we should check our priors to ensure what we're consuming can be trusted and is verifiably true as LLMs exude confidently incorrect behavior.

I want to point out that you are posting from a 5-months old account (squarely within a time frame where LLM-powered accounts would be created), with an UUID-sounding username, claiming a 10-year-old professional history in the field, and using those credentials to bring up the possibility that a 14-year-old account claiming to be an MD with `md` in the username and _lots_ of comments is LLM-generated and asking for skepticism.

It's not particularly helpful; you could easily have done the 5 minutes of work.

Post reply on HN