>No negativity towards AI here. It’s amazing and it’ll change the future. But we need to be careful on the way.
Yeah, I suspect a lot of fields will have a similar trajectory to how AI has impacted radiology.
It might catch the tumor in 99.9999% of cases, better than any human doctor. But missing a malignant tumor 0.0001% of the time is unacceptable, because it spikes the hospital's malpractice costs. So every single scan still has to be reviewed manually by a doctor first, then by the AI as a fallback.
In theory there's some insurance scheme that could overcome this, but in practice when you have software reviewing millions of scans a day you're opening yourself up to class action lawsuits in a way no competent human doctor would.
Yeah, I suspect a lot of fields will have a similar trajectory to how AI has impacted radiology.
It might catch the tumor in 99.9999% of cases, better than any human doctor. But missing a malignant tumor 0.0001% of the time is unacceptable, because it spikes the hospital's malpractice costs. So every single scan still has to be reviewed manually by a doctor first, then by the AI as a fallback.
In theory there's some insurance scheme that could overcome this, but in practice when you have software reviewing millions of scans a day you're opening yourself up to class action lawsuits in a way no competent human doctor would.