Hey Hoffman, remember the sneezes you had in succession last winter for 2 weeks straight? I asked chatgpt and tells me is brain cancer. Are you going to start cancer therapy ASAP?
PS: for the people that still remember WebMD at the start, they would never trust a machine for full diagnosis, let alone considering this as an option
"Sir, you seem to be low on vitamin C, which gave you scurvy, but Grok says that it is more likely to be an psychosomatic response to an internal conflict between the way you live your life, and the Hitler inside you waiting to be let out"
There are a bunch of studies that in general show there is an effect where, despite what people say and think, they inevitably start to offload decision making to AI inappropriately and it eventually makes them worse. Harvard did a study specifically around radiologists, interestingly enough.
AI (statistical predictive models) work best when it's designed for a specific purpose and when the model is too challenging to derive by hand. Detecting tumors is a specific purpose, and doing so manually is challenging enough that it requires specific training. It gets a pass by me.
Predicting protein structures/drug effects: specific purpose, check. Doing it manually, yep, very challenging. Good use of AI.
LLM chatbot: purpose is unclear. Making a non-AI-based chatbot is easy and has been done before. Verdict: useless technology
Or to put it another way, use the right tool for the job don't use the shitty multi tool that does every job passably at best. The only exception to this rule of thumb is the humble spork, but that's a piece of engineering genius that couldn't be replicated by AI pushers.
If your doctor isn't using AI, they are incompetent and awful and should be considered malpractice
to
We shouldn't be forcing these Big Government Regulations on the itty bitty small bean doctors who just want to help people
Techno-Libertarianism in a nutshell. It is never a serious analysis of best practices and procedures. Always some hollow appeal to legalism out of one side of the mouth and denouncement of bureaucracy out of the other. And all in pursuit of selling a new line of magic fucking beans to the rubes.
Counting the days until Dr. Oz is talking about LLMs like he talks about ginseng and acai berry juice.
I check it out once in a while to see what's going on, and the OpenAI people apparently seemed to try to fix the sycophancy problem by turning it into an insufferable pedant.
"I want to check... you should put pants on before leaving the house, right?"
"That's not exactly right. Putting pants on involves putting your legs into the leg holes in the pants. After that you should zip and button any zips and buttons on your pants."
I had a very entertaining time asking search engine AI about various bacteria when writing an open book exam.
Ask how X bacteria acts in the oral cavity, and the AI summary calls it a beneficial species
Ask how X bacteria relates to periodontal disease, and the AI summary tells you it is a pathogen of utmost importance.
It answers solely based on how you pose the question and does not even provide an accurate summary of the websites it purports to have used as sources.
Older adults have always made a fool of themselves when new tech comes out as they scramble over each other to either voice dramatically out-of-touch opinions or avoid it entirely while preaching moral panic. This time around with AI, there's not a big financial barrier to access so the youth are equally in on the game.
The number of competent experts who are impressed by an LLM wielded in their specified field, is as vanishingly infinitesimal as legitimate and justifiable invocations of the term ‘AI’.
Those who have expressed the greatest enthusiasm for ‘AI’ are typically the farthest removed from actual, nuanced comprehension.
It’s a grift economy built on statistically luke-warm, vibe lobotomised corpses.
A professional using AI as part of your diagnosis is fine.
A professional using AI to diagnose you is not.
To put it another way. If I had a condition, and my doctor used and AI to look through thousands of studies to find a treatment regimen that fits my particular health profile better than the standard treatment and they then review the sources and decide that it would be a safer and more effective option than the standard care, then I'm all for that. If my doctor says "I asked this AI, and it said do this", then I'm definitely not doing "that" until I check in with another doctor.
and my doctor used and AI to look through thousands of studies to find a treatment regimen that fits my particular health profile better than the standard treatment
I already immediately left a veterinarian for using AI as part of its xray diagnosis process, which may even be somewhat acceptable since computer vision is relatively mature. Fuck if I’m lasting 5 mins with a human doctor that utters the letters “AI.”
I can’t speak for veterinary, but in dentistry AI can be problematic because:
A) it really over-diagnoses - it’s very very sensitive, meaning that it identifies things that aren’t necessarily clinically relevant
B) it does not compare to previous radiographs, so it cannot give reasonable clinical judgement on whether decay is active or arrested.
It could be a helpful tool to give you a laundry list of places to check. However, I’ve used demo software and did not find it added anything for me, although I have 15 years experience. You still need to use your clinical judgement.
I do worry about the younger clinicians being over-reliant on it, as they have it pushed on them by multi-practice dental corporations.
Yep, the “laziness” of reliance was a big part of my immediate reaction. I’ve recently found out that veterinary clinics across the country, and especially in Texas, were aggressively moved on by investment capital in the years between now and my last dogs. The pet economy, including medical care, has long been seen as recession proof. Medical care in particular is seen as emotionally driven and ripe for greater exploitation, so of course the vultures moved in. Having AI flag everything, allowing you to show a customer tons of things to worry about and milk them for more diagnostics, a.k.a. more money, is the logical conclusion.
It’s a disturbing trend - dental offices are also being acquired by investment groups that run them as purely a business rather than a health care service.
I have spoken to some younger dentists when I go to courses, and it sounds as though they are receiving disciplinary conversations/actions when they do not treat what the AI tells them to. The business expects them to transfer the responsibility of diagnosis to a computer program ( and frankly a shitty one) yet still be medicolegally responsible for making the decision to treat.
Yet when they get sick enough they ALWAYS go to the hospital. Same with covid. If you don't trust doctors when you're healthy then stop trusting them when you're sick. Just reminds me of that "the only moral abortion is my abortion" story.
AI is great at being a sort of consultant. Something to bounce ideas off of. Sometimes it comes up with something you hadn't thought of. It's great to confer with. However, it's terrible to rely on. Confer with it, but don't defer to it.
Nah, I work in AI for medicine we have lots of data that it does actually help.
My work specifically looks at images from scans (mostly MRI and X-ray) to diagnose conditions (mostly respiratory) before even senior doctors are able to reliably diagnose it. It's already out working in the world and has saved hundreds of people's lives already.
I also have friends that work in AI diagnosis and they have similar success and just save doctors a ton of time.
purposefully misunderstanding the concept of a “second opinion”
The premise of a second opinion is that the secondary voice demonstrates core competencies in a specific field of study.
not having used an LLM since the original ChatGPT
4.0 is the one that has been driving celebrities insane with its endless stream of sycophancy. LLMs have grown progressively worse over time. In part due to modern models training against their own slop and in part due to marketing teams kicking actual developers out of the drivers' seat to sell more tokens.
The last fucking thing medical specialists need is an algorithm to inflate their own egos.
Y'all will screech but having a giant ass search engine that is able to process patient data in context is incredibly useful.
Y'all are just prejudice. Professionals will be using these tools and they already have been providing excellent real world results. Honestly, if you don't understand how the medical community is using AI/ml with real validated results, you should be keeping your mouth shut on the topic.
Lemmy has a massive problem with bot accounts, astroturfing, and ban evasion that no one really wants to admit. Right wing propaganda is also becoming much more common on the fediverse. As much as people like to bash other social media and say lemmy / the fediverse is immune to this stuff, it really isn't. Being smaller just means it takes longer to spread here, but it definitely has started.
Yup. Account age is an utterly pointless and a shitty evaluation tool. Unless you're just looking to attach a person rather than the idea 🤷♂️. Just creates little shitty echo chambers to attach yourself to.
And fedverse makes it literally impossible to stop. Tech bros really not thinking through how people think, act, and build trust.
Did it feel good reporting me? Do you feel effective?
Which is why your doctor should use it as a tool and validate the results. You know, do their job.
Y'all are just fucking binary. How do you think medical and community members work now? They use a shitty search engine or portal to look up material, and yes, some of it will be garbage they need to wade through.
But God forbid they have a tool that puts that information into a cited overview to supplement a tricky diagnosis. The prejudice and fake workflows that y'all invent is crazy. Looking for little edge cases everywhere catching the AI in a mistake
The thing is the AIs that doctors are using aren't just the commercially available chatgpt or Gemini, they are specialized, tuned for accuracy and only trained on medical articles.
Imagine believing that they'll use general purpose free chatgpt. Just amazing these scenarios you all invent. I can't tell if it's just straight blind prejudice or you all really don't understand how it can integrate into tooling with very specific models.
Just wild what people have cooked up in their mental model.
They literally do. ChatGPT and Copilot. I work medical field adjacent, and these are what the providers use. Not cooked up in a mental model, witnessed directly.
Take note that I'm only replying to refute your ignorance. I'm not going to engage with whatever AI generated ragebait vitriol you spew at me.
I have no problem with them using search engines. They can vet and choose answers from reliable sources. From an LLM, it's anybody's guess if anything it pulled up is correct, and a less experienced doctor could be misled into making a dangerous mistake.
When was the last time you used them? They can provide sources for pretty much everything they say and that source usually also contains said thing too.
But even if not, even back 2 years ago, it was already good because you had a second look, a different perspective. A medical professional can either know little about everything or much about next to nothing. It should be really obvious how such a tool can help, even if it can not reach expert level.
"Don't worry, when you ask it for sources it gives you some. Sometimes they are even real! And sometimes the real ones even say the thing they were supposed to have said from the AI!"
Riiiiiiiiiight, LLMs don't cite sources and the portals written in the 90s for journals solve all of that.
It's so amazing to watch you all invent these crazy scenarios, where you've chosen the absolute lowest bar you can find. As if some layman who has no clue how to use this tool is working on some free Claude account because you read about one shitty doctor or lawyer fucking up. It's honestly sad seeing these hoops to jump through.
Professional tools, run by some of the most educated type a professionals in the planet minimize and reduce these risks by providing defaults and interfaces along with education.
FFS they can (and will) kill you accidentally with far more simple shit that can't be mostly mitigated away. But yeah, because LLMs can be used poorly by morons it's worthless 🙄.
As if some layman who has no clue how to use this tool is working on some free Claude account because you read about one shitty doctor or lawyer fucking up
Do you know what happens when doctors fuck up?
Like, I don't think this is the slam dunk reply that you think it is.
I ask LLMs medical questions almost daily and it gets it wrong most of the time. Do I have data or a study to back this claim up, no, but if you check the sources (Perplexity) you can just see the wrong interpretation of studies or disreputable web content sources (county fair science projects, Reddit, quack websites)
It’s sometimes useful for general knowledge if you really don’t care that it might be wrong, but I’m not sure when this would be the case with medical advice
The confidence with which LLMs misstate facts and my inability to know which of my healthcare workers is blindly trusting of these tools makes it dangerous
Using their institutional knowledge, and critical thinking to wade through unrelated search results is not the same as asking a sycophantic chat bot that's programmed to always answer with complete confidence whether it's right or wrong
I absolutely love that you all think that there are only these models designed to make you like the product. It's like watching Republicans scream to the world how ignorant you are. Everything is a chatbot to you all 😂
I love that you keep saying that with no proof to back up a claim. Which chatbot do you use then? And if you don't say exactly which chatbot you use everyone will know you're a stupid liar.
Microsoft MAI-DxO is currently winning in our metrics but not widely available. At this point in time it is the obvious winner although not in GA. DxGPT second followed by path AI and AI doc. All these have completed FDA requirements, been studied, and enjoyed a success rate near our better then doctors when used parallel in diagnosis.
This takes away from slowing down to learn core medical skills. Hospitals and clinics will have some bean counter enforce it's use for speed and to meet quotas but ignore that sometimes important problems just require time with a patient.
My assumption is that these tools won't be used for the doctors benefit but for administration to push expectations that will result in a worse level of care between a patient and doctor. They already have and will continue to become mandatory and that's a problem if it pushes away good doctors who don't need them.
The best work I've seen anywhere is from people who know their job so well, they don't have to look something up. They troubleshoot it without sitting at a computer or opening their phone, but drawing on experience they gained because they put in the time to understand instead of something shitting it into their lap.
Hey Hoffman, remember the sneezes you had in succession last winter for 2 weeks straight? I asked chatgpt and tells me is brain cancer. Are you going to start cancer therapy ASAP?
PS: for the people that still remember WebMD at the start, they would never trust a machine for full diagnosis, let alone considering this as an option
Reid Hoffman: the original LinkedIn Lunatic
"Sir, you seem to be low on vitamin C, which gave you scurvy, but Grok says that it is more likely to be an psychosomatic response to an internal conflict between the way you live your life, and the Hitler inside you waiting to be let out"
Image recognition to help radiologists find tumors is probably fine; especially since you can usually run those models locally.
These morons think ChatGPT is “conscious” and “was trained on humanity’s collective knowledge”. THAT is the problem with
AI Derangement SyndromeEDIT: aw fuck let’s not use that acronym
There are a bunch of studies that in general show there is an effect where, despite what people say and think, they inevitably start to offload decision making to AI inappropriately and it eventually makes them worse. Harvard did a study specifically around radiologists, interestingly enough.
The "only use it as an aid" seems to be a myth.
To me it seems very similar to cocaine.
AI (statistical predictive models) work best when it's designed for a specific purpose and when the model is too challenging to derive by hand. Detecting tumors is a specific purpose, and doing so manually is challenging enough that it requires specific training. It gets a pass by me.
Predicting protein structures/drug effects: specific purpose, check. Doing it manually, yep, very challenging. Good use of AI.
LLM chatbot: purpose is unclear. Making a non-AI-based chatbot is easy and has been done before. Verdict: useless technology
Or to put it another way, use the right tool for the job don't use the shitty multi tool that does every job passably at best. The only exception to this rule of thumb is the humble spork, but that's a piece of engineering genius that couldn't be replicated by AI pushers.
If you aren't conscious its easy to think chatgpt is
That edit is a absolute 10/10 I burst out laughing
That’s deep learning, and it’s a well known and understood statistical tool.
Context: Coding in medical nomenclature refers to code blue (life threatening emergency)
I would love to see an LLM doctor trained only on the TV show House.
Did you try the medicine drug?
It is very curious rhetorical move from:
to
Techno-Libertarianism in a nutshell. It is never a serious analysis of best practices and procedures. Always some hollow appeal to legalism out of one side of the mouth and denouncement of bureaucracy out of the other. And all in pursuit of selling a new line of magic fucking beans to the rubes.
Counting the days until Dr. Oz is talking about LLMs like he talks about ginseng and acai berry juice.
This shit is bananas
Your comment just caused some who needs FMT to receive bananas instead.
I check it out once in a while to see what's going on, and the OpenAI people apparently seemed to try to fix the sycophancy problem by turning it into an insufferable pedant.
"I want to check... you should put pants on before leaving the house, right?"
"That's not exactly right. Putting pants on involves putting your legs into the leg holes in the pants. After that you should zip and button any zips and buttons on your pants."
I had a very entertaining time asking search engine AI about various bacteria when writing an open book exam.
Ask how X bacteria acts in the oral cavity, and the AI summary calls it a beneficial species
Ask how X bacteria relates to periodontal disease, and the AI summary tells you it is a pathogen of utmost importance.
It answers solely based on how you pose the question and does not even provide an accurate summary of the websites it purports to have used as sources.
Older adults have always made a fool of themselves when new tech comes out as they scramble over each other to either voice dramatically out-of-touch opinions or avoid it entirely while preaching moral panic. This time around with AI, there's not a big financial barrier to access so the youth are equally in on the game.
The Luddites were right, and so are we.
I hope his doctor does ask Chat GPT and it prescribes him a penectomy.
Another one?
The number of competent experts who are impressed by an LLM wielded in their specified field, is as vanishingly infinitesimal as legitimate and justifiable invocations of the term ‘AI’.
Those who have expressed the greatest enthusiasm for ‘AI’ are typically the farthest removed from actual, nuanced comprehension.
It’s a grift economy built on statistically luke-warm, vibe lobotomised corpses.
We should ask AI if tech CEOs are worth keeping around despite the negative impacts of AI construction and implementation.
I just wanna know how much the AI lobbyists gave him to say that..
That’s Reid Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn and a major investor in at least one “AI” company: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reid_Hoffman?wprov=sfti1
Oh, so that's why LinkedIn has so much AI spam.
Just...read the text that's there?
He's on LinkedIn, it's probably free so he can convince the AI daddies to notice him
Elon Musk's AI recommends Ivermectin and anal bleaching, because it's biased. I don't care if what I said was true.
But it is biased.
Imagine doctors using the same AI that convinced that poor, lonely guy to kill himself!
I mean, the anal bleaching probably can't hurt right?
A professional using AI as part of your diagnosis is fine.
A professional using AI to diagnose you is not.
To put it another way. If I had a condition, and my doctor used and AI to look through thousands of studies to find a treatment regimen that fits my particular health profile better than the standard treatment and they then review the sources and decide that it would be a safer and more effective option than the standard care, then I'm all for that. If my doctor says "I asked this AI, and it said do this", then I'm definitely not doing "that" until I check in with another doctor.
We used to call that a search engine.
And who needs the pesky internet? We still have libraries! Ever heard of a book?
You know that technology that suggested a deadly mix of drugs to a teen? The same one that routinely suggests people should kill themselves? Your doctor should ignore their years of medical training and see what spicy autocorrect thinks your treatment should be.
That's an amazing post title, bravo
That’s LinkedIn for you. Just corporate felating in the desperate hopes a CEO will notice you
I already immediately left a veterinarian for using AI as part of its xray diagnosis process, which may even be somewhat acceptable since computer vision is relatively mature. Fuck if I’m lasting 5 mins with a human doctor that utters the letters “AI.”
I can’t speak for veterinary, but in dentistry AI can be problematic because:
A) it really over-diagnoses - it’s very very sensitive, meaning that it identifies things that aren’t necessarily clinically relevant
B) it does not compare to previous radiographs, so it cannot give reasonable clinical judgement on whether decay is active or arrested.
It could be a helpful tool to give you a laundry list of places to check. However, I’ve used demo software and did not find it added anything for me, although I have 15 years experience. You still need to use your clinical judgement.
I do worry about the younger clinicians being over-reliant on it, as they have it pushed on them by multi-practice dental corporations.
New fear unlocked
Yep, the “laziness” of reliance was a big part of my immediate reaction. I’ve recently found out that veterinary clinics across the country, and especially in Texas, were aggressively moved on by investment capital in the years between now and my last dogs. The pet economy, including medical care, has long been seen as recession proof. Medical care in particular is seen as emotionally driven and ripe for greater exploitation, so of course the vultures moved in. Having AI flag everything, allowing you to show a customer tons of things to worry about and milk them for more diagnostics, a.k.a. more money, is the logical conclusion.
It’s a disturbing trend - dental offices are also being acquired by investment groups that run them as purely a business rather than a health care service.
I have spoken to some younger dentists when I go to courses, and it sounds as though they are receiving disciplinary conversations/actions when they do not treat what the AI tells them to. The business expects them to transfer the responsibility of diagnosis to a computer program ( and frankly a shitty one) yet still be medicolegally responsible for making the decision to treat.
Ya an LLM is very different than a vision based machine learning /trained visual model on something specific like x-rays.
Now, if its just a LLM looking at an xray image, that's another story, and it could've been that too.
Exactly. Imagery is my field so them just saying “AI X-ray analysis” instead of something more specific or scientific didn’t inspire confidence.
Yet when they get sick enough they ALWAYS go to the hospital. Same with covid. If you don't trust doctors when you're healthy then stop trusting them when you're sick. Just reminds me of that "the only moral abortion is my abortion" story.
AI is great at being a sort of consultant. Something to bounce ideas off of. Sometimes it comes up with something you hadn't thought of. It's great to confer with. However, it's terrible to rely on. Confer with it, but don't defer to it.
He needs help to care for more people than just himself.
Nah, I work in AI for medicine we have lots of data that it does actually help.
My work specifically looks at images from scans (mostly MRI and X-ray) to diagnose conditions (mostly respiratory) before even senior doctors are able to reliably diagnose it. It's already out working in the world and has saved hundreds of people's lives already.
I also have friends that work in AI diagnosis and they have similar success and just save doctors a ton of time.
There's a difference between properly trained single purpose models and LLMs
Yes, that's the point of my comnent
That’s an ML application, not random text generators.
Machine learning is AI
Your face is AI.
I already loved it when I had GPs who googled my symptoms. Now with added made-up nonsense!
"Take two rocks and prompt me in the morning."
That title is Brilliant
AI shouldn’t replace doctors, but using it as a second set of eyes makes sense. The key is keeping a human responsible for the final call.
People purposefully misunderstanding the concept of a "second opinion" and not having used an LLM since the original ChatGPT. 🙄
The premise of a second opinion is that the secondary voice demonstrates core competencies in a specific field of study.
4.0 is the one that has been driving celebrities insane with its endless stream of sycophancy. LLMs have grown progressively worse over time. In part due to modern models training against their own slop and in part due to marketing teams kicking actual developers out of the drivers' seat to sell more tokens.
The last fucking thing medical specialists need is an algorithm to inflate their own egos.
I prefer getting my second opinions from a trained medical professional and not a chatbot. I’m weird like that.
You're absolutely right. We definitely need to remove your head so you can survive.
AI has helped me in medical issues far more than my lame Dr
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_Awards immediately came to mind.
Lol. Nothing that serious. Just trying to track down mysterious symptoms and link things.
Y'all will screech but having a giant ass search engine that is able to process patient data in context is incredibly useful.
Y'all are just prejudice. Professionals will be using these tools and they already have been providing excellent real world results. Honestly, if you don't understand how the medical community is using AI/ml with real validated results, you should be keeping your mouth shut on the topic.
Yeah. Wouldn’t that be nice. That’s not what an LLM is, however.
Why did you assume AI = only LLM? LLMs are just one type of AI, and not the type most often used in medicine
Reid Hoffman is one of those lunatics who thinks LLMs are intelligent. His entire thing is peddling that shit.
LLMs being “search engines” is also a really popular misconception.
I didn't know the guy, I was just addressing the general point of using AI in medicine tbh 🤷♀️
You're completely correct that LLMs are not search engines, of course
So then I guess you shouldn't have lead with:> but having a giant ass search engineSay what you mean and mean what you say or you're just spouting shit that no one will listen to.that wasn't me?! I was just replying to the bit about conflating AI with LLMs, like I was saying 😭
Oh jeeze, my apologies, poor attention paying on my part. Please carry on.
👌👍
What's with all these brand new accounts lately that seem to have been created for the sole purpose of defending AI.
GTFO you Altman propaganda bot.
Lemmy has a massive problem with bot accounts, astroturfing, and ban evasion that no one really wants to admit. Right wing propaganda is also becoming much more common on the fediverse. As much as people like to bash other social media and say lemmy / the fediverse is immune to this stuff, it really isn't. Being smaller just means it takes longer to spread here, but it definitely has started.
Ahhh the, everyone I disagree with is a Nazi or bot. Solid.
Yeah this site has been positively overrun by pro-AI commenters. And it's a recent phenomenon.
Maybe people are using it 🤷♂️
The only thing you comment on is ai, maybe you sycophants are just too obsessed and feel the need to argue about it.
It's a day old account 🤣🤷♂️
Say the line Bart!
"Everyone I didn't agree with is a bot"
Hmmm a 1 day-old account rushing in to defend inappropriate LLM use 🤔
You can only get banned for an opinion so much before moving on to the next one 🤷♂️.
Nice, ban evasion as well 👍🏻
Yup. Account age is an utterly pointless and a shitty evaluation tool. Unless you're just looking to attach a person rather than the idea 🤷♂️. Just creates little shitty echo chambers to attach yourself to.
And fedverse makes it literally impossible to stop. Tech bros really not thinking through how people think, act, and build trust.
Did it feel good reporting me? Do you feel effective?
Weren't you literally just defending LLMs?
Yes, people are banned for their opinions... not for breaking the rules.
Yes. All the time.
If LLMs didn't hallucinate I'd fully agree with you
You can tune an AI to not hallucinate. Like you can just program it so it will return actual verbatim article snippets.
Which is why your doctor should use it as a tool and validate the results. You know, do their job.
Y'all are just fucking binary. How do you think medical and community members work now? They use a shitty search engine or portal to look up material, and yes, some of it will be garbage they need to wade through.
But God forbid they have a tool that puts that information into a cited overview to supplement a tricky diagnosis. The prejudice and fake workflows that y'all invent is crazy. Looking for little edge cases everywhere catching the AI in a mistake
Using AI as a tool to find additional information? Sure, could be doable maybe.
Asking sycophantic ”you’re absolutely correct” machines for second opinion? Absolutely not!
Hoffman is advocating for the latter.
The thing is the AIs that doctors are using aren't just the commercially available chatgpt or Gemini, they are specialized, tuned for accuracy and only trained on medical articles.
Imagine believing that they'll use general purpose free chatgpt. Just amazing these scenarios you all invent. I can't tell if it's just straight blind prejudice or you all really don't understand how it can integrate into tooling with very specific models.
Just wild what people have cooked up in their mental model.
They literally do. ChatGPT and Copilot. I work medical field adjacent, and these are what the providers use. Not cooked up in a mental model, witnessed directly.
Take note that I'm only replying to refute your ignorance. I'm not going to engage with whatever AI generated ragebait vitriol you spew at me.
Will those are the idiots who were already lazy and going to kill you 🤷♂️
There is proper tooling, and they should be learning to use it.
Further proof you can't read
I have no problem with them using search engines. They can vet and choose answers from reliable sources. From an LLM, it's anybody's guess if anything it pulled up is correct, and a less experienced doctor could be misled into making a dangerous mistake.
When was the last time you used them? They can provide sources for pretty much everything they say and that source usually also contains said thing too.
But even if not, even back 2 years ago, it was already good because you had a second look, a different perspective. A medical professional can either know little about everything or much about next to nothing. It should be really obvious how such a tool can help, even if it can not reach expert level.
"Don't worry, when you ask it for sources it gives you some. Sometimes they are even real! And sometimes the real ones even say the thing they were supposed to have said from the AI!"
Fucking lunacy.
Riiiiiiiiiight, LLMs don't cite sources and the portals written in the 90s for journals solve all of that.
It's so amazing to watch you all invent these crazy scenarios, where you've chosen the absolute lowest bar you can find. As if some layman who has no clue how to use this tool is working on some free Claude account because you read about one shitty doctor or lawyer fucking up. It's honestly sad seeing these hoops to jump through.
Professional tools, run by some of the most educated type a professionals in the planet minimize and reduce these risks by providing defaults and interfaces along with education.
FFS they can (and will) kill you accidentally with far more simple shit that can't be mostly mitigated away. But yeah, because LLMs can be used poorly by morons it's worthless 🙄.
Do you know what happens when doctors fuck up?
Like, I don't think this is the slam dunk reply that you think it is.
I'm pretty sure I'd care if thought you could read. I addressed your question.
I ask LLMs medical questions almost daily and it gets it wrong most of the time. Do I have data or a study to back this claim up, no, but if you check the sources (Perplexity) you can just see the wrong interpretation of studies or disreputable web content sources (county fair science projects, Reddit, quack websites)
It’s sometimes useful for general knowledge if you really don’t care that it might be wrong, but I’m not sure when this would be the case with medical advice
The confidence with which LLMs misstate facts and my inability to know which of my healthcare workers is blindly trusting of these tools makes it dangerous
Well I'm sure free chatgpt is the best we can do 😂
Where did I say chatgpt?
Using their institutional knowledge, and critical thinking to wade through unrelated search results is not the same as asking a sycophantic chat bot that's programmed to always answer with complete confidence whether it's right or wrong
I absolutely love that you all think that there are only these models designed to make you like the product. It's like watching Republicans scream to the world how ignorant you are. Everything is a chatbot to you all 😂
I love that you keep saying that with no proof to back up a claim. Which chatbot do you use then? And if you don't say exactly which chatbot you use everyone will know you're a stupid liar.
Microsoft MAI-DxO is currently winning in our metrics but not widely available. At this point in time it is the obvious winner although not in GA. DxGPT second followed by path AI and AI doc. All these have completed FDA requirements, been studied, and enjoyed a success rate near our better then doctors when used parallel in diagnosis.
This takes away from slowing down to learn core medical skills. Hospitals and clinics will have some bean counter enforce it's use for speed and to meet quotas but ignore that sometimes important problems just require time with a patient.
My assumption is that these tools won't be used for the doctors benefit but for administration to push expectations that will result in a worse level of care between a patient and doctor. They already have and will continue to become mandatory and that's a problem if it pushes away good doctors who don't need them.
The best work I've seen anywhere is from people who know their job so well, they don't have to look something up. They troubleshoot it without sitting at a computer or opening their phone, but drawing on experience they gained because they put in the time to understand instead of something shitting it into their lap.
Hi Reid
Exsqueeze me, but if my doctor wants to search for giant asses, then he needs to do it on his own time.