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

Robot dentist performs first human procedure

newatlas.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 381 posts

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#351

Post by simianparrot »

prmoustache wrote: post #290
simianparrot wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every dentist I go to use single-use thin nitril or similar gloves. If they have to use any of the non-sterilisable equipment (like the mouse or kb), they take said glove off before use and put on a new one after. I mean that’s just common sense, surely.

Common sense would mean that my local butchers and fishmongers would not handover money and manipulate raw meat/fish with the same nitrile gloves and either employ an assistant or use a dedicated machine for that but they do not.

They do here but Norway has a functional balance of regulations and fines for this kind of stuff. Sometimes it’s too strict though but I certainly appreciate it.

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#352

Post by bradfa »

77pt77 wrote: post #230
crystalmeph wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But also going to the dentist already isn't exactly pleasant, the pokes, scrapes, drill noises, etc. Maybe we improve that first before sticking it in a robot? From the article: > The machine's first specialty: preparing a tooth for a dental crown. Perceptive claims this is generally a two-hour procedure that dentists will normally split into two visits. The robo-dentist knocks it off in closer to 15 minutes. So th…

> which will hopefully reduce anxiety as well as reducing costs. We all know this is not going to happen. You'll just pay a premium for the novelty.

I would pay slightly more if it meant I only had to be in the dentist's chair once for 15 minutes instead of 2 hours split over 2 visits.

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#353

Post by LoganDark »

jeffbee wrote: post #338
LoganDark wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dropshipping is when you order from a merchant and all the merchant does is make an order with your name and address from someplace else. In other words, you could have simply made that second order yourself and saved yourself whatever margin the merchant added on top. Do note that dropshipping is a very specific term, which does not mean "importing things from another country and then selling them locally", but rath…

That's just marketing. There is nothing wrong with this!

It's not ethical for someone to clone a more expensive version of some Amazon listing onto another site, and then order stuff from Amazon to whoever buys the listing, pocketing the difference. It's just scummy. Sites like Alibaba really do help because otherwise importing stuff is a lot more manual of a process, but dropshipping on its own is just ugh.

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#354

Post by jeffbee »

LoganDark wrote: post #353
jeffbee wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just marketing. There is nothing wrong with this!

It's not ethical for someone to clone a more expensive version of some Amazon listing onto another site, and then order stuff from Amazon to whoever buys the listing, pocketing the difference. It's just scummy. Sites like Alibaba really do help because otherwise importing stuff is a lot more manual of a process, but dropshipping on its own is just ugh.

> It's not ethical for someone to clone a more expensive version of some Amazon listing onto another site, and then order stuff from Amazon to whoever buys the listing, pocketing the difference

This is textbook marketing. You connect buyers and sellers and take a profit. You are bringing the product to the attention of a previously-unaware consumer. I can't imagine what you think is not ethical about this.

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#355

Post by resource_waste »

idiotsecant wrote: post #341
resource_waste wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an example that disagrees. I had a stomach bug, and a Physician was insistent I get xrays. I put my symptoms into chatGPT, and it agreed that the xray was unnecessary. I saved hundreds of dollars, I learned my doctor was corrupt, and tbh... I already knew what I had before going to the doctors. I only needed the doctor to write the prescription.

Have you considered that your doctor might have had an actual reason to want you to get an X-ray and that maybe chatgpt is wrong? Absolutely wild to me that you distrust a human but feel like a glorified autocomplete is somehow completely trustworthy. They can both lie, but at least the human knows they are lying.

Buddy, the xray was to find a stone or something.

Anyway, chatgpt was right, physician was wrong.

So... we are denying reality now?

EDIT: I should mention, literally every patient was offered an xray. We were in a communal area. It didn't help that their ads across the wall were full of pseudoscience too.

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#356

Post by sunjieming »

elif wrote: post #285

I'm way more interest robotic diagnosis than robotic treatment. It's so hard to trust dentists have your interest above their financial interest

Whenever there's information asymmetry that financially benefits one party you have to be cautious. It's been shocking how many times people I know have sought second opinions on recommended dental work only to be given a completely different recommended treatment that's thousands of dollars cheaper.

Example from a friend: Dentist 1 - you need ten fillings today! Dentist 2 - You have a few risk spots but let's just keep an eye on it.

Went with the second recommendation and didn't have any issues and that was a decade ago.

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#357

Post by grraaaaahhh »

Zambyte wrote: post #310
dotancohen wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Diagnosis is currently extremely subjective. I believe that GP is suggesting that robotic diagnosis will be more objective and determinant. Ostensibly, because financial considerations will not be part of the input to the diagnosis routine. That said, financial considerations will probably still be a big part of the treatment routine.

> Ostensibly, because financial considerations will not be part of the input to the diagnosis routine. Devices that overreport are likely to be more popular and more common than devices that underreport. That is in part due to the financial incentives associated with diagnosing.

To tie in the sibling threads: devices that underreport will also be popular, just with the insurance companies after the fact to help them deny covering procedures. Your lung biopsy come back benign? CignaAI says you shouldn't have had it in the first place so out of pocket for you!

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#358

Post by Ylpertnodi »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #302
perlgeek wrote: post #298

90% accuracy for diagnosing cavities doesn't seem that great to me, would be good to see dentist's accuracy in comparison. Otherwise very impressive.

I'd be surprised if dentists even make an attempt to be 90% accurate. Why be accurate when your goal is to make money, and suggest procedures, rather than be accurate?

My dentist always gives me three quotes ‐ low, middle, high. And he explains the features, benefits and possible problems with each one.

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#359

Post by LoganDark »

jeffbee wrote: post #354
LoganDark wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not ethical for someone to clone a more expensive version of some Amazon listing onto another site, and then order stuff from Amazon to whoever buys the listing, pocketing the difference. It's just scummy. Sites like Alibaba really do help because otherwise importing stuff is a lot more manual of a process, but dropshipping on its own is just ugh.

> It's not ethical for someone to clone a more expensive version of some Amazon listing onto another site, and then order stuff from Amazon to whoever buys the listing, pocketing the difference This is textbook marketing. You connect buyers and sellers and take a profit. You are bringing the product to the attention of a previously-unaware consumer. I can't imagine what you think is not ethical about this.

It's okay when the product they're selling is their own product. Say, Amazon fulfillment. The manufacturer sends their products to an Amazon warehouse and then Amazon handles shipping them out. But if a seller claims to have their own product but then just goes to another listing and buys it to the customer, that is what I think is unethical.

IMHO reselling is OK only if it's disclosed what the original brand of the product is... but even reselling doesn't necessarily imply dropshipping.

Re: Robot dentist performs first human procedure

#360

Post by mrtranscendence »

rscho wrote: post #137
whimsicalism wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, what is a randomized controlled trial when we have your 'gut feel' to rely on. Great showing from the physicians in the comments here, now I can clearly see why we should have trust in your evidence-based practice.

I do clinical statistics. I make such studies. Sorry the sausage is not the way you dreamt it!

X says "I would like RCTs on this subject", and you reply that most RCTs are worthless. Great, what do you want, a cookie? Presumably they want good RCTs, not low-quality ones.
Post reply on HN