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

A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

codastory.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 145 posts

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#31

Post by 015a »

anthonyskipper wrote: post #15
coliveira wrote: post #10

Everyone should be terrified. The "promise" of AI is the following: remove any kind of remaining communication between humans, because that is "inefficient", and replace it with an AI that will mediate all human interactions (in business and even in other areas). In a few years, AIs trained by big corps will run the show and humans will be required to interface with them to do anything of value. Similar to what they…

Some of us look forward to that future where you mostly just interact with AI. The one depressing us is not turning running over our goverment to AI. The sooner we can do that the better, you can't trust humans.

You won't receive better outcomes in this world. The people in charge will simply change what they're measuring until the outcomes look better.

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#32

Post by axpvms »

anthonyskipper wrote: post #15
coliveira wrote: post #10

Everyone should be terrified. The "promise" of AI is the following: remove any kind of remaining communication between humans, because that is "inefficient", and replace it with an AI that will mediate all human interactions (in business and even in other areas). In a few years, AIs trained by big corps will run the show and humans will be required to interface with them to do anything of value. Similar to what they…

Some of us look forward to that future where you mostly just interact with AI. The one depressing us is not turning running over our goverment to AI. The sooner we can do that the better, you can't trust humans.

[flagged]

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#33

Post by PhasmaFelis »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #3
Festro wrote: post #2

"We didn’t call it AI at first." Because the first things described in the article are not AI. They are ML at most. Then the article discusses a patient needs scoring method, moving from their own Low/Medium/High model to a scoring method on an unbound linear scale. The author appears to struggle with being able to tell if 240 is high or not. They don't state if they ever had training or saw documentation for the sco…

> AI converging with medical technology is a really dangerous space, for obvious reasons. An article like this does make me worry it's being rushed through, but not because of the author's objections, instead because of their ignorance of what is and what isn't AI I mean, worth pointing out that OpenAI has been shoving LLMs into people's faces for going on about a year and half now at global scale and calling it AI,…

That's been the technical definition in the AI research community for at least 50 years. "AI = machines that think like people" is the sci-fi definition.

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#34

Post by randomdata »

itishappy wrote: post #26
anthonyskipper wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us look forward to that future where you mostly just interact with AI. The one depressing us is not turning running over our goverment to AI. The sooner we can do that the better, you can't trust humans.

Can we trust AI?

Yes, we can. But should we?

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#35

Post by stego-tech »

Loughla wrote: post #5

Healthcare is a massive cost for people, businesses, and governments. >So we basically just become operators of the machines. Driving down the cost of manufacturing because of process standardization and automation brought down the cost of consumer goods, and labor's value. If you don't think this is coming for every single area of business, you're foolish. Driving down labor costs is the golden goose. We've been abl…

> If you don't think this is coming for every single area of business, you're foolish. Driving down labor costs is the golden goose.

I mean, that’s saying the quiet part out loud that I think more people need to hear and understand. The goal of these technocrats isn’t to improve humanity as a whole, it’s to remove human labor from the profit equation. They genuinely believe that it’s possible to build an entire economy where bots just buy from other bots ad infinitum and humans are removed wholesale from the economy.

They aren’t building an AI to improve society or uplift humanity, they’re building digital serfs so they can fire their physical, expensive ones (us). Deep down, I think those of us doing the actual labor understand that their vision fundamentally cannot work, that humans must be given the opportunity to labor in a meaningfully rewarding way for the species to thrive and evolve.

That’s not what these AI tools intend to offer. The people know it, and it’s why we’re so hostile towards them.

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#36

Post by anadem »

daemin wrote: post #23
fhfjfk wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about increasing the supply of doctors rather than decreasing the time they spend with patients? I question the underlying premise that efficiency needs to increase.

Because the USA is for-profit healthcare industry they need to optimise and increase efficiency. That's the only way to make the numbers go up. Therefore fewer doctors, fewer nurses, fewer administrators (maybe), and more paying patients.

> more paying patients

that's a chilling thought; don't give them ideas

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#37

Post by david-gpu »

1986 wrote: post #27
anthonyskipper wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us look forward to that future where you mostly just interact with AI. The one depressing us is not turning running over our goverment to AI. The sooner we can do that the better, you can't trust humans.

"You can't trust humans" but you can trust a non deterministic black box to take their place?

Humans already are non-deterministic black boxes, so I'm not sure I would use that comparison.

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#38

Post by slater »

anadem wrote: post #36
daemin wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the USA is for-profit healthcare industry they need to optimise and increase efficiency. That's the only way to make the numbers go up. Therefore fewer doctors, fewer nurses, fewer administrators (maybe), and more paying patients.

> more paying patients that's a chilling thought; don't give them ideas

Surprising that you imply they haven't already been capitalizing (ha!) on that idea since the 1970s :D

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#39

Post by vladms »

coldpie wrote: post #20
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Driving down the cost of manufacturing because of process standardization and automation brought down the cost of consumer goods, and labor's value. We don't need AI to bring down the cost of healthcare. It's well documented to a ridiculous degree now that the United States spends vastly more per-patient on healthcare while receiving just about the worst outcomes, and it has nothing the fuck to do with how much the…

Well put. The goal of AI isn't to bring down costs. It's to move (even more of) the profits from the workers to the owners. If the goal was to bring down costs, there are way, way more effective ways to do that.

What references you have for "even more of"?

Global inequality is dropping : https://ourworldindata.org/the-history-of-global-economic-in...

Yes, probably the richest do now crazier stuff than before (ex: planning to go to Mars rather than making a pyramid), but lots of people have access to more things (like food, shelter, etc.)

There are enough open source models weights so that everybody can use AI for whatever they want (with some minor investments in a couple of GPU). It is not some closed secret that nobody can touch.

Re: A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

#40

Post by croes »

anthonyskipper wrote: post #15
coliveira wrote: post #10

Everyone should be terrified. The "promise" of AI is the following: remove any kind of remaining communication between humans, because that is "inefficient", and replace it with an AI that will mediate all human interactions (in business and even in other areas). In a few years, AIs trained by big corps will run the show and humans will be required to interface with them to do anything of value. Similar to what they…

Some of us look forward to that future where you mostly just interact with AI. The one depressing us is not turning running over our goverment to AI. The sooner we can do that the better, you can't trust humans.

If you don't trut humans you shouldn't trust AI-.

AI is based on human input and has the same biases.

Post reply on HN