Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

theguardian.com

481–490 of 500 posts

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Human problems can't be solved with technology" is just wrong, unless you have narrower definitions of a "human problem" or "technology". For instance, transportation is a "human problem". It's being successfully solved with such technologies as cars, trains, planes, etc. Growing food at scale is a "human problem" that's being successfully solved by automation. Computing... stuff could be a "human problem" too. It's…

I think you may be misunderstanding the concept of 'human problem'. A human problem is caused by humans, it isn't something like transportation. That is a physics problem. An example of a human problem is cheating; you can't solve cheating with technology. Just add [incentive] after human and it should make more sense.

IMO "human problem" isn't a well-defined concept, so it's not really possible to misunderstand it. I think a "human problem" is a problem that _humans have_: how to move around? (transportation) what to eat? (agriculture, etc) how to prevent cheating? (some kind of surveillance) how to communicate over long distances? (radio, the internet, etc)

Sure, some kinds of such "human problems" can be reduced to physics and technology, that's the point. This also doesn't necessarily mean that solutions produced by such reductions are effective: is surveillance good at preventing cheating during exams? Kind of. Does it often fail to catch cheating students? Absolutely.

However, indeed, there can be many different (perhaps equally correct) definitions of what a "human problem" is.

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#482
post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does she think this really does the complexity of each case justice though? Do you believe that -prior to the 2020-ish mass evacuation of doctors from the profession- the typical specialist would misrepresent the facts of a case when asking for a cross-check? Related: Have you ever worked as "the guys who actually work on the thing"-level tech support for a nontrivial Enterprise Software Product (or System)? If you…

An enterprise product is not comparable with the human body at all. A single cell contains hundreds of times more information/entropy in its state than an operating system.

> An enterprise product is not comparable with the human body at all.

Incorrect! Enterprise products are often sprawling projects that

* are poorly designed

* are inadequately (and often incorrectly) documented

* have confusing and/or inadequate diagnostic facilities

* are far, far too large for any one person to completely understand

* have one or components that no one adequately understands

* are pretty much constantly in a state of partial failure

* usually don't require an understanding of -say- the QM principles that govern the behavior of the medium that embodies system in order to perform system diagnostics and repair

Given that you dodged them, I'll assume that your answer to my first question to you is "Yes", and to my second is "No".

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah apparently my comment wasn't clear enough. If you can get the opinion of a doctor then good for you. I'm saying an LLM is the best some of us can get.

Oh right. Almost everyone in the world has free and easy access to actual doctors. For that one country that doesn’t maybe universal healthcare can be an Anthropic model.

I live in a country with "free and universal" healthcare (Brazil). And guess what? I also pay for private healthcare and both sucks. Even the local private doctors (outside of healthcare) aren't that great and they are expensive. Maybe your local reality is different but for us that live the other side of the coin AI is a net positive.

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > you can't order many of your own labs > Really? Which ones? There are extremely short lists of labs you can order yourselves. Virtually all of them are not on those short lists?

I would love to hear of any specific example, I will happily either show you how to order it or learn something myself.

Arterial blood gas. Calcium score (may not count as a lab). Skin biopsy for cancer (does it count as a lab?). I'm unaware how to order my own troponin if I think I've had a heart attack (not that that's one I should DIY diagnosis). Prostate specific antigen.

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe the issue is because they don't have enough technicians to diagnose or because they don't have enough x-ray machines? Or in a ER environment, how an AI would speed up things in a real way that improves patients' lives? We just minted the term "cognitive debt" for software engineers that cannot keep up with what the AI spits out. How would that apply to ER doctors, or any other kind of doctor?

I'm not talking in particular about the X rays. It's about general lack of hospitals, equipment and doctors. In Europe, there are some rich cities which have on average one doctor per hundred people. And there are large areas in Eastern Europe that have ten times less than that.

Even more then... How a lack of hospitals can be fixed by AI diagnosis?

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if your political opponents see things similarly. Types like these, a theory of mind is especially useful.

Of course they do. Most of their platform is built on [appearing] to repudiate coastal elitism and left wing dogma in higher education + globalism with a healthy dose of fuck you because you're you. And I graciously waited and allowed them to do things that will take decades if not more to repair before deciding they were irredeemable. I had hoped a middle ground and bipartisan ship would be reached, but it's clear t…

You are describing a set of dynamics that lead nowhere other than violence and total and complete breakdown of the polity. If you are correct, then nothing matters, everything is fucked. You won't get what you want, but neither will anyone else.

My preferences, while possibly futile, are least an attempt to not just accomplish short term goals but to fix the broken dynamics of the system. That is, in my opinion, far more important than literally any particular policy goal. Policy progress is pointless in a broken system, so fix the system first.

It's possible that my view of focusing on fixing the system, restoring institutions, erecting new guide-rails in places we have observed that the old ones don't work, etc. won't work. But at least it has a chance of producing a good outcome. A good outcome literally can't come from the kind of political behavior you describe. You want your side to seize as much power as it possibly can when it wins, enact as much "good" as it possibly can in however long it can maintain it's grip before the political tides inevitably swing and you lose power again. You don't seem to realize that this is what we have been doing for at least several cycles now. And what we have seen is that the next administration just tears up the progress, does the same thing except in the opposite direction and even harder, and does what they view as "the good thing" and which your side views as nothing but unmitigated evil (the same way they viewed you and yours when you were in power), and so the both sides have accomplished nothing but pushing the pendulum a little bit further, giving it a little more momentum, and shredding up the social fabric a little bit more.

I'm not so naive as to believe that it is possible for just one side to say "no we won't do that, we will unilaterally disarm". But I am of the belief that, if one wants to pretend that one is "on the side of good", that the only rational action is to, when granted power, to spend as much political capital as is possible to slow down the pendulum, tear back power from the bloated executive and the federal branch more broadly. Stop trying to enact your political project and instead make your political project nothing other than the restoration of the norms and principles of the constitution.

This is not something that has been tried and failed. it's the opposite of the past 50 years of federal political dynamics. What has been tried is your plan of "fuck the other side, they are evil, just do what our base wants and ignore consensus and norms".

It doesn't work, it won't work, and it can't work. It's destroying the country.

From my perspective, you are no better than the side you hate. You may want different policy goals, but both you and your polar opposites are collaborating on a shared project: the destruction of the country.

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not talking in particular about the X rays. It's about general lack of hospitals, equipment and doctors. In Europe, there are some rich cities which have on average one doctor per hundred people. And there are large areas in Eastern Europe that have ten times less than that.

Even more then... How a lack of hospitals can be fixed by AI diagnosis?

It can't fix, but it can help.

If you have some unusual symptoms or a little pain somewhere and no access to doctors you will most likely ignore it.

If you can get any diagnosis it can help you e.g. decide to travel to get treatment.

And the locally available alternative for ai diagnosis is a doctor you can get to in few months, who works 80 hours a week and has 10 minutes per patient.

For ai to be valuable you really don't need to be better than average physician in top American clinic.

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course they do. Most of their platform is built on [appearing] to repudiate coastal elitism and left wing dogma in higher education + globalism with a healthy dose of fuck you because you're you. And I graciously waited and allowed them to do things that will take decades if not more to repair before deciding they were irredeemable. I had hoped a middle ground and bipartisan ship would be reached, but it's clear t…

You are describing a set of dynamics that lead nowhere other than violence and total and complete breakdown of the polity. If you are correct, then nothing matters, everything is fucked. You won't get what you want, but neither will anyone else. My preferences, while possibly futile, are least an attempt to not just accomplish short term goals but to fix the broken dynamics of the system. That is, in my opinion, far…

I want my party back and I want to cut out all the garbage that has infested it. Sometimes that requires taking an actual stand and staying firm to it. Middle road nonsense like what you're suggesting is impotent when one side has so clearly decided to be against it.

Edit: And coming back to this later I need to be clear the left also needs to be swept out. I think our institutions in general need to be reworked. Not replaced entirely, but it's clear they don't survive contact with people who would abuse them for their own ends nearly as well as we had hoped.

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My dumb answer would be that less fat means more sugar per kcal, so less satiety per kcal. No idea if that's correct.

Incorrect, not all products that reduce fat necessarily increases carb/sugar content.

Wrong. If you just take out the fat you've necessarily got more of everything else per kcal. I didn't say per volume, I said per kcal.

Re: OpenAI’s o1 correctly diagnosed 67% of ER patients vs. 50-55% by triage doctors

#490
post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An enterprise product is not comparable with the human body at all. A single cell contains hundreds of times more information/entropy in its state than an operating system.

> An enterprise product is not comparable with the human body at all. Incorrect! Enterprise products are often sprawling projects that * are poorly designed * are inadequately (and often incorrectly) documented * have confusing and/or inadequate diagnostic facilities * are far, far too large for any one person to completely understand * have one or components that no one adequately understands * are pretty much const…

Well, I don't doubt that enterprise deployments can be complex, but this is a false analogy.
Post reply on HN