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

IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 71 posts

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#21

Post by gridaphobe »

abcd_f wrote: post #18

On one hand it's impressive and huge and through that is somewhat intimidating and scary, because it makes one feel like losing control (to the "machines"). On the other hand it's a straight-forward extension of a basic calculator. There are tasks that humans can do, but not as fast, so why not automate them? It doesn't mean that no one can subtract and divide by hand, it just makes one's work more efficient. Similar…

I don't think the concern is that the next generation of doctors will be incompetent, but perhaps they won't be as quick as their elders. There are times where you can't wait 30 seconds for Watson to suggest a course of action.

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#22

Post by Evbn »

nolok wrote: post #15

This is truly impressive. The only part that I'm unsure about it is when they say they "WellPoint will be using the system [to help] health insurers determine which treatments are fair, appropriate and efficient and, in turn, what it will cover", the possibility for abuse their is significant. Anyway, congrats to anyone at IBM who worked on this, when you make the future so great it feels natural, you're doing it rig…

But is the potential worse than existing systems?

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#23

Post by Evbn »

abcd_f wrote: post #18

On one hand it's impressive and huge and through that is somewhat intimidating and scary, because it makes one feel like losing control (to the "machines"). On the other hand it's a straight-forward extension of a basic calculator. There are tasks that humans can do, but not as fast, so why not automate them? It doesn't mean that no one can subtract and divide by hand, it just makes one's work more efficient. Similar…

Not of Watson is missing an audit trail of its fuzzy calculations.

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#24

Post by Evbn »

visarga wrote: post #17
jcfrei wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree - this seems like a turning point in health care. granted, in five years most people will still get their medical advice from a person - but I wonder for how much longer after that.

I am extremely happy about Watson, but I need to point out some possibilities: Imagine this scenario. John earns 100K $/year, so he gets access to Watson. Jerry earns only 30K $/year, so he can only use the open source one, which has 10% less accuracy. That would be tragic. Another scenario: doctor X sees the Watson prediction, and has a doubt about them. He doesn't say anything for fear he could be charged with malp…

Google will make a free version.

10% less accuracy isn't tragic if it is phenomenonally better than what we have today.

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#25

Post by Evbn »

speeder wrote: post #9
tluyben2 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blindly trusting your doctor is dangerous, yet most people do.

Well... I don't. And then other people get mad at me for that, I am kinda tired that every time I argue with a doctor (or that people find out that I did that), there are a argument about how I am not a student of medicine or a doctor and should not argue with them. So there is kind a social pressure toward that. But I still don't trust them anyway (because I have my symptoms, there are good research on the subject,…

Find better doctors. My doctors never argue from authority, and are willing to challenge some "research"

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#27

Post by tluyben2 »

cfn wrote: post #10
tluyben2 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blindly trusting your doctor is dangerous, yet most people do.

I suppose very few doctors have way less than 90% accuracy and, on top of that, Watson is not sensitive to external factors. This is a fantastic tool and may end up changing the way we interface with the health care system.

I know at least a few doctors (and one surgeon) who know they weren't in optimal condition at times because of personal issues. It's only human, but it's horrible if things go wrong because of that.

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#28

Post by tluyben2 »

giardini wrote: post #19
booruguru wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preach on. I'm baffled by how techies can be so underwhelmed by what IBM is doing.

Such software has been available for decades, been shown to be superior to human diagnosis, and yet has not been accepted by the medical community. Doctors will likely continue to push back. It may require restructuring of the medical education community (perhaps a' la the movie Idiocracy) to bring about utilization. "50 years of successful predictive modeling should be enough: Lessons for philosophy of science (2002…

I didn't read your links yet (on mobile), but I will. I know of great knowledge base systems from the 80s which were never accepted but performed very well. A UK PhD who now makes his money in pharma told me that, although the results were better, those systems were effectively blocked by the physician community (anyone has any citation/references?).

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#29

Post by xradionut »

visarga wrote: post #17
jcfrei wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree - this seems like a turning point in health care. granted, in five years most people will still get their medical advice from a person - but I wonder for how much longer after that.

I am extremely happy about Watson, but I need to point out some possibilities: Imagine this scenario. John earns 100K $/year, so he gets access to Watson. Jerry earns only 30K $/year, so he can only use the open source one, which has 10% less accuracy. That would be tragic. Another scenario: doctor X sees the Watson prediction, and has a doubt about them. He doesn't say anything for fear he could be charged with malp…

"Africa would be revolutionized by it."

Correction: Healthcare in Africa "could" be revolutionized by it. No amount of tech/aid is going to "fix" Africa until decades of human greed and stupidity get reversed.

Re: IBM's Watson Gets Its First Piece Of Business In Healthcare

#30

Post by gwern »

tluyben2 wrote: post #28
giardini wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such software has been available for decades, been shown to be superior to human diagnosis, and yet has not been accepted by the medical community. Doctors will likely continue to push back. It may require restructuring of the medical education community (perhaps a' la the movie Idiocracy) to bring about utilization. "50 years of successful predictive modeling should be enough: Lessons for philosophy of science (2002…

I didn't read your links yet (on mobile), but I will. I know of great knowledge base systems from the 80s which were never accepted but performed very well. A UK PhD who now makes his money in pharma told me that, although the results were better, those systems were effectively blocked by the physician community (anyone has any citation/references?).

Legal issues and medical opposition was the explanation I read for why http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MYCIN never went into practical use.
Post reply on HN