And even there, I bet ChatGPT would have told you to go see a doctor, since it can't feel your balls. And after your first appointment, if you had told it that you still thought something was wrong, it would probably have told you to go see a urologist.
So what is the value add of ChatGPT in this scenario? Either it says you don't need to see the doctor which could very well kill you or it tells you to visit the doctor and it doesn't actually help you in any way.
So, a technical solution to a bureaucratic problem.
Also, even when I'm on a PPO plan instead of HMO...I know when I have a yeast infection. I don't want to pay $100 to tell a doctor that I have a yeast infection. They don't even look at my genitals - they just take my word for it. But I can't buy fluconazole without a prescription. Such a waste of everyone's time and my money.
So again, a technical solution to a bureaucratic problem.
(If your HMO charges $200 for a PCP visit - wow, I’d look for a different plan.)
The AI is just making an already convoluted system more convoluted.
Mistakes will happen, that's the nature of statistics of this nature. But don't forget that saving 1,000s of people time is worth something, even if you never directly see it like you do the one case that it didn't catch.
How many unnecessary deaths does that buy you?
Which invalidates the whole point. There are countless ways that the healthcare industry could save time if it was willing to sacrifice an unknown number of lives.
How is this scenario any different from some other arbitrary decision made for the sake of expediency such as doctors deciding to no longer collect medical histories from new patients? Think of all the time that could be saved if you never had to fill out those forms the first time you saw a doctor. Who cares if that leads to more people dying, it saves some time!
You're saying "some change is bad therefore all changes are bad", which is obviously fallacious.
I did not advocate for this specific release being better, and I certainly did not say we should "move fast and break things". I don't know who you think you're arguing against but it's not me.
I only pushed back on the specific idea that this there is no possible value-add by this kind of software.
Not _yet_!
The third doctor used to behave more like the first two. In a world where ChatGPT replaced the rookies, how do we get good doctors?
And, for the record, I was referred to a Urologist. The doctor was able to say "something isn't right but I don't know what" and he referred me to a Urologist and got my ultrasounds.
No offense to uh... AI... but it's not very good at being humble. It seems hubris wasn't in the training data. It's quite difficult to get an LLM to say "I don't know". Usually you have to prime it or ask leading questions, which at that point you already know that it doesn't know so therefore trying to elicit that response is worthless.