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

Midjourney Medical

midjourney.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 927 posts

Re: Midjourney Medical

#671

Post by krick »

reverius42 wrote: post #369
mNovak wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already ultrasound babies in the womb, so one would hope this has been studied.

Before ultrasound, they used to x-ray pregnant women to see the fetus. At that time, someone might have said "one would hope this has been studied"... unfortunately that practice went on for about 60 years before being stopped in the late 1950s. Side note: kinda crazy they had medical x-rays in the 1890s. X-Ray imaging was discovered in 1985 and used clinically within 2 years. But I do agree with your point, these da…

> But I do agree with your point, these days, I hope we're better about studying the potential dangers of current technologies we use.

Sorry, but this is just pure "Gell-Mann amnesia effect" vibe to me. I mean, you've just brought up a perfect example yourself! What kind of mental gymnastics does it take to still hope that this time it's not like that?

I don't wanna start the whole "vaccines cause autism" thing and whatnot, and surely you shouldn't avoid ultrasound just because of irrational fear of some yet undiscovered side-effects, but it's really amazing, how people tell fun stories about how common was the narrative about major war being very unlikely in "modern days" (because who would dare to do that with this kind of technology!) right before WW1, and then conclude with firmly believing that these days (after WW2) it sure won't happen, because humans are not that dumb. And my point is, that perhaps it indeed might have been a bit less likely, if people didn't believe that it is so unlikely to keep stepping on the same rake.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#673

Post by altmanaltman »

klabb3 wrote: post #600
altmanaltman wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're romanticizing art generation a bit. A lot of it operates like a normal working job, there is no magic "truly creative genuis", a lot of working artists treat it as their jobs and if a tool helps them get their job done, it is helpful. Not every creative profession is something where you create something you're proud of or you own. You're often just one part of a massive machine working on a project. It…

Both ”creative mythical noble artist” and ”creative work is just work” are unhelpful strawman arguments. One is elitist, the other is reductionist. Creativity is neither a property of who you are or what you do. It’s about how you do it. It’s closer to a mindset of curiosity, wonder and play. For example, many programmers have a need for creativity within coding, but don’t feel they get it at their 9-5 job, and inste…

I don't understand your point. You say:

> Creativity is neither a property of who you are or what you do

Then you say:

> It’s closer to a mindset of curiosity, wonder and play.

Which has to be the property of what you do (the process) or who you are (the personality willing to embed those values), right?

> It’s the process that’s creative. Building a car can be creative. Buying a car is not.

Sure, but the process is "what you do" which directly contradicts what you're saying.

> For example, many programmers have a need for creativity within coding, but don’t feel they get it at their 9-5 job, and instead work a side project (like FOSS, indie game) because it’s a more creative experience.

Sure but most programmers don't do it. Simillarly many artists work on projects for companies and their own projects. My point is that you cannot reduce commercial work as not creative just because it's a 9-to-5.

I really fail to understand your point with this comment since it's not really saying anything coherent.

You also say

> The point is: same person, same activity yet one is more creative than the other.

Again, if that person is doing that activity then it is what they do i.e. you're calling the process creative. And in this case, we'll call that same person to be creative since they have the drive to work on their own project after a full 9-5 job. But if they were not doing it, we'll still consider them creative since it is a basic requirement at their 9-5. That is my point - both of them are creative. Degrees may vary depending on subjective perception but that was not what was being discussed.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#675

Post by hereme888 »

arcticbull wrote: post #283
hereme888 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's precisely where medicine is headed: personalized medicine. You [hopefully] won't have to become a rare missed diagnosis because you didn't fit the demographic for this or that screening test. Cost of genomic analysis is exponentially decreasing, and so much progress is happening so quickly. Consider for example how in cardiology we advanced from ASCVD's 10-yr prognosis, to the PREVENT 30-yr prognosis. And stil…

You’re dealing with populations here. Literally the odds of a positive being false would be over 90%. Much higher in the more rare conditions. I’m not exaggerating. That means every almost every follow up you do is a waste of time, money and limited resources, denying care to those who need it. Including you when you actually do need it. It also exposes you to the risks of unnecessary follow-ups like infection. Your…

You're right. I wrote a bad response at midnight. I meant to say something more narrow and specific: genomic assessments and new biomarker tests will become affordable and add information.

For example, single nucleotide polymorphisms. This way doctors spend less time guessing which medication is likely to work best for you when there are many options available.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#676

Post by nancyminusone »

moduspol wrote: post #643
tmhrtly wrote: post #571

> You want as much data as you can get about your health as quickly and as cheaply as possible. In other words, you want a technology optimized for getting as many “megabytes per second per dollar” of information about your body. This is so far from my vision of what I want from healthcare. I want a healthcare system that is optimised around A) proactively keeping me healthy, and B) reactively helping get back to hea…

The way we figure out how to catch issues before you notice them (i.e. proactively keeping you healthy) and figure out the best ways to fix them (i.e. reactively helping you get back to healthy) is by having more data from more people in more situations, so we can make those determinations. I understand some of the current fatigue around biohacking and chasing perhaps-irrelevant metrics, but takes like this surprise…

I can easily and cheaply generate nore megabytes per second per dollar by oversampling a heart rate monitor at hundreds of megahertz. Hell, why not hook up a second channel to the same signal and record it twice for double the megabytes?

Do you see the problem here? "yeah, but nobody's doing that" Well, then it certainly is odd of them to frame it tgat way, isn't it?

Re: Midjourney Medical

#677

Post by zephyreon »

nlkkjhlkjsd wrote: post #662
moduspol wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way we figure out how to catch issues before you notice them (i.e. proactively keeping you healthy) and figure out the best ways to fix them (i.e. reactively helping you get back to healthy) is by having more data from more people in more situations, so we can make those determinations. I understand some of the current fatigue around biohacking and chasing perhaps-irrelevant metrics, but takes like this surprise…

I've been reading this website on and off for years now, and I remember one time I read that a silicon valley startup was selling a "smart cup" that would send you detailed statistics of how much water you drank (assuming you used your smart cup for every drink throughout the day). I suspect if I pitched this to doctors, they would say just drink when your thirsty; you don't need all that data. But that's not the poi…

> But considering they first plan to deliver this in a fancy spa, and that it's coming from a tech company, not pharma, my reflex is to question the medical value of this data.

I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that the entire pharma industry is not exactly known for their motivation to research and develop therapies for the betterment of humanity. Case in point, the opioid crisis, wherein pharma’s goal was to just sell as much of the drugs as possible without regard for the impact those drugs were having on the people taking them.

I’m not saying this to defend tech — they’re guilty of the same things. I am saying this to suggest that if this play by Midjourney to reject VC funding and really lean into a community supported research lab works then you might end up with something closer to an altruistic approach than you would have otherwise.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#678

Post by wl »

jermaustin1 wrote: post #638
sobiolite wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't they serving the same thing? Proactively and reactively keeping you healthy requires understanding your body, both the baseline of how it functions when you're healthy, and how it functions when you're not. Right now we're often in a situation where the only data you have is expensive tests ran when you're sick enough to justify them, when it may already be too late.

> Right now we're often in a situation where the only data you have is expensive tests ran when you're sick enough to justify them, when it may already be too late. In the USA, an annual physical includes a good deal of blood tests covered 100% by ACA-compliant insurance plans. The problem is most people don't do it. As a person with a few chronic conditions, I'm getting bloodwork done every few months at the cost to…

Even those annual blood tests can be problematic.

When I first started getting annual blood tests there were two values in particular that were consistently elevated. A bunch more tests and some specialist visits later the explanation was that I have a harmless genetic mutation that just causes those values to be high.

A few years back I had some different values pop high. They implied scary things. More specialist visits than before. A lot more tests. After months of that all of the scary things were eventually ruled out. And then the values went back to normal. Nobody has an explanation even now.

This is just with a pretty standard battery of tests: CBC with differential, comprehensive metabolic panel, lipid panel, TSH with reflex, vitamin D. They catch enough bad things that they're generally worth ordering on a regular basis for healthy people at annual physicals. The occasional wild goose chases like what happened with me is the price we pay for catching the more serious things.

I guess we'll see just how valuable monthly whole body ultrasounds are. There's a real risk that it will catch a lot of benign things without catching enough serious things.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#679

Post by wj »

dperfect wrote: post #649
GTP wrote: post #560

I find the technology side intriguing and worth a deeper dive. But I'm not convinced about their view of having people casually going to a spa every week and getting a full body scan. AFAIK, some doctors tend to avoid full-body scans. The reason is that each body is different and has its own quirks. If you do a scan for no reason other than "I can do it fast", chances are that the scan will show something unusual. Bu…

Overdiagnosis can be a problem. On the flip side, I wonder if adding the time dimension to the data (i.e., you could realistically have scans from every few weeks over the course of years) could significantly change that. Instead of looking at a single snapshot of a person, you're now looking at trends over time. We probably don't have the analytical tools to effectively evaluate medical imaging with that time dimens…

This seems like something MLB teams would install in their locker rooms if it works.

Re: Midjourney Medical

#680

Post by MichaelZuo »

moduspol wrote: post #643
tmhrtly wrote: post #571

> You want as much data as you can get about your health as quickly and as cheaply as possible. In other words, you want a technology optimized for getting as many “megabytes per second per dollar” of information about your body. This is so far from my vision of what I want from healthcare. I want a healthcare system that is optimised around A) proactively keeping me healthy, and B) reactively helping get back to hea…

The way we figure out how to catch issues before you notice them (i.e. proactively keeping you healthy) and figure out the best ways to fix them (i.e. reactively helping you get back to healthy) is by having more data from more people in more situations, so we can make those determinations. I understand some of the current fatigue around biohacking and chasing perhaps-irrelevant metrics, but takes like this surprise…

That is a good point. There’s no point arguing about how well the map correlates with the territory… if the map isn’t even in your hands yet.
Post reply on HN