this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
995 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59669 readers
4135 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Over half of all tech industry workers view AI as overrated::undefined

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bassomitron 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Personally, I think medicine will be the most impacted by AI. Medicine has already been increasingly implementing AI in many areas, and as the tech continues to mature, I am optimistic it will have tremendous effect. Already there are many studies confirming AI's ability to outperform leading experts in early cancer and disease diagnoses. Just think what kind of impact that could have in developing countries once the tech is affordably scalable. Then you factor in how it can greatly speed up treatment research and it's pretty exciting.

That being said, it's always wise to remain cautiously skeptical.

[–] FlyingSquid 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] DrCake 20 points 1 year ago

Common US healthcare L

[–] dustyData 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I’s ability to outperform leading experts in early cancer and disease diagnoses

It does, but it also has a black box problem.

A machine learning algorithm tells you that your patient has a 95% chance of developing skin cancer on his back within the next 2 years. Ok, cool, now what? What, specifically, is telling the algorithm that? What is actionable today? Do we start oncological treatment? According to what, attacking what? Do we just ask the patient to aggressively avoid the sun and use liberal amounts of sun screen? Do we start a monthly screening, bi-monthly, yearly, for how long do we keep it up? Should we only focus on the part that shows high risk or everywhere? Should we use the ML every single time? What is the most efficient and effective use of the tech? We know it's accurate, but is it reliable?

There are a lot of moving parts to a general medical practice. And AI has to find a proper role that requires not just an abstract statistic from an ad-hoc study, but a systematic approach to healthcare. Right now, it doesn't have that because the AI model can't tell their handlers what it is seeing, what it means, and how it fits in the holistic view of human health. We can't just blindly trust it when there's human lives in the line.

As you can see, this seems to be relegating AI to a research role for the time being, and not on a diagnosing capacity yet.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

You are correct, and this is a big reason for why "explainable AI" is becoming a bigger thing now.

[–] randon31415 3 points 1 year ago

There is a very complex algorithm for determining your risk of skin cancer: Take your age ... then add a percent symbol after it. That is the probability that you have skin cancer.