Comment by mittensc | Hacker News Reader

Comment by mittensc | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I find your comment a bit funny

> Try prompting Claude to fix an arbitrary code base better than someone who knows it, when you're a random non-technical person.

I've seen people employed working on some code bases that couldn't code at all.

> Try prompting Claude for legal advice and getting as good of results as Lawyer would if you're a layperson.

Some lawyers are downright incompetent and don't know what they're talking about / just want your money.

> Try prompting Claude for medical advice if you're not a doctor...

Some doctors are downright incompetent or malicious. You'd generally find that out by vising another doctor and finding previous diagnostic was bullshit and you lost time.

> AI is just going to speed run bringing out the best and worst in coworkers.

It does help people overall, the worst coworkers are probably going to still be there, just a bit better hidden.

The rest just have a new-age search engine to augment their capabilities.

> You'd generally find that out by vising another doctor and finding previous diagnostic was bullshit and you lost time.

To be fair the human body is immensely complex. Every specialist will look at everything through the lens of their field, as at the very least they can rule out some things this way.

I had a doctor judge that my tonsils need to be removed, but for unrelated reasons I went to two other and both of them figured it's not as bad yet.

The difference between them was generational, as the first practiced an approach from 30 years ago, back when tonsils were indeed commonly removed.

I've seen doctors that:

1. Immediately said 'Cancer' to stomach issues on an old person. They just didn't care, another doctor resolved that.

2. Eye doctors that would not investigate anything and just prescribe eye glasses and would recommend local companies that they owned or had a stake in.

3. Fake gynecologists that did C-Sections brutally without any experience

4. Fake plastic surgeons with no experience just going by word of mouth taking rich peoples money

5. Fertility doctors doing human egg-trafficking.

6. General doctors forcing appendectomy if under-18s came to the hospital with any stomach complains (they could not refuse, doctor got money for the surgery)

Sure, human body is complex. That wasn't my point.

In what context did you witness all these cases?

It's one thing to know these cases exist because they all have been reported in the news or having made a note of it through separate and unrelated word of mouth interactions, but one person having direct experience of all these cases is unusual for a civilian (ie non-medical or healthcare professional).

3 would be either direct or friends/relatives with experience and I got involved to help, other 3 would be through news and incidentally knowing some people.

> but one person having direct experience of all these cases is unusual for a civilian

Sure, still, indirect stories I have a lot more, just stopped at those 6

Where I'm from half of these points mean actual jail time for the physician attempting them, most of the rest (like kickbacks) result in standing in front of an ethics committee.

ai good cos some ppl bad.

I've been calling it the "AI argument from misanthropy" but that's way more succinct. Thanks.

What really drives me crazy is how laden it is with negative emotions, and then people pretend it's just a rational assessment of the world. I was told growing up that if you're anxious or negative, it's just because you are smart and you understand how terrible everything is, while stupid people are happy. Seems like a lot of people got a similar message, and now they're shilling AI.

AI good cos vastly better than most people at most verbal tasks.

Those low quality lawyers and doctors are still vastly more capable than a layperson at verifying AI output

Those low quality lawyers/doctors still won't care enough to help the layperson.

So for the layperson, the AI output is still useful. They'll know to search for a different lawyer/doctor.

Tool just brings more knowledge to regular people.

It's like discovering search engine 20+ years ago.

The whole point is that the layperson is not classically trained to know right from wrong which is the entire thesis of knowledge share. Even post doctorate students are required to have their work peer reviewed. It’s why anthropic and OpenAI put disclaimers below their chat prompts

Recently someone I know came up with a statement "AI is like opening borders, like abolishing visas."

I think it's very perceptive and you can even view reactions to AI through that lens. Somehow both, the "immigrants" are taking our jobs but they are way worse than all of us at them. And the people from outside any given domain (art, coding, law) that advent of AI suddenly let into it, marvel at this land of opportunities, empowerment and self-reliance that used to be outside of their reach before that.

> Those low quality lawyers/doctors still won't care enough to help the layperson.

I had a pediatrician who I regarded as generally low quality until she correctly identified scarlet fever in my child, while AI and a doctor in training we knew didn't.

> who I regarded as generally low quality

how did you come up with this assessment

Reply on news.ycombinator.com