Hacker News Reader

Comment by carbocation | Hacker News Reader

I remember when Hinton said that that we should "stop training radiologists now" in 2016[1]. Meanwhile, radiologists are in high demand and are getting paid better than ever. I believe the same will be true for programmers in the future. Sure, some of the boilerplate will be handled for you, just like segmentation is for radiologists. That's great for everyone.

1 = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HMPRXstSvQ&t=30s

View on HN

Optimistic me waiting for all clinics to have one-home worth MRIs which can be placed between steel racks and plugged into a socket. Now every doc will need to become a radiologist.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20240510/Machine-learning-...

A radiologist is training for a 35-40 year career though. I definitely would not have wanted to have started that training in 2016.

The notion of no longer training radiologists because computer vision algorithms and deep learning are good at detecting cancers in imagery strikes me troublingly naïve. Who fucking trained the AIs? Will the AIs magically be able to detect yet to be discovered maladies?

Fwiw this is not new. I worked on a machine vision project to evaluate x-rays for cancer...in 1985.

Did the radiologists suddenly get better than the AI at reading images? Or is the system simply unchangeable?

A few responses:

- Since when have the radiologists ever been worse than AI at reading images?

- AI is doing mechanical tasks for the radiologists, so it stands to reason that this makes radiologist more efficient.

- The radiologist is a liability sponge, so if at all possible it of course makes sense to augment the radiologist with AI rather than to try to do away with them. (This roughly gets at your point about the system being unchangeable.)

> Since when have the radiologists ever been worse than AI at reading images?

Since 2 years~ish?

For segmentation? Sure. For their role as a clinical consultant? Not yet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com