Hacker News Reader

Comment by ones_and_zeros | Hacker News Reader

I think the point of this project is to replace the people, not necessarily to make software for people to use. Software is just means to an end.

View on HN

> I think the point of this project is to replace the people

No. Not at all.

The point of this project is to create trust; trust that healthcare consumers can get the services they need, and trust that government will spend healthcare dollars judiciously.

Ideally, I think you need to replace both concurrently. Consider Uber for example. They didn't sell the app concept to the existing taxi companies and the taxi companies didn't hire piecemeal staff, it was a complete alternative.

Might not be a way in all cases, but if you offer people a new system (people and software) that is a viable alternative, they will start to jump ship.

This does seem like the way things will need to go. The system may need to break down completely in order to be recreated. Perhaps it will start in a state with sufficient size to achieve price bargaining power.

Perhaps some combination of eliminating medical school tuition, exemption from liability, and long term contracts could be used to recruit the talent.

If that is true, how is a pilot project in the developing world going to help at all in that sense? It doesn't seem like it is particularly relevant to the goal of reducing bureaucracy in the United States. Or do they really believe making a software platform is the missing piece here?

I didn't see anything in OP about the goal being to reduce bureaucracy in the United States. Everything in OP seems explicitly global.

Nothing in the OP mentions US at all. It explicitly says "governments" in plural.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com