I just discovered Woody Guthrie after watching the "No direction home" documentary about Bob Dylon on Netflix.
There is incredible, timeless insight into the human condition in his work.
Thank you for posting this.
62 karma · joined December 31, 2019
There is incredible, timeless insight into the human condition in his work.
Thank you for posting this.
https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/glen-weyl-radically-....
https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/glen-weyl-radically-...
This pandemic started because too many people are living together in close proximity, eeking out a living by literally catching and eating any living thing they can.
The economic effects are due to an unforgiving system that takes pride in an 'eat what you kill' culture and a 'winner take all' model of enterprise. As a consequence, there are a LOT of businesses running on thin margins and making just enough to cover costs each month.
Even one month of things going to zero will ruin a whole host of restaurants, sole proprietors, real estate speculators, and on down the chain. I hope I'm wrong, but this kind of instant systematic reduction in the economy feels unprecedented within the last 50+ years.
There are so many knock on effects of all this - people will be unemployed with limited opportunities at best. They'll potentially lose their healthcare, and in the worst cases their homes. Schools are closing around the country, and they won't have lunch programs running which means a lot of kids are likely to go without adequate food.
We need to fix (or create) safety nets in our country (and indeed the world), so when things like this happen we can all chip in to cover each other. Basic healthcare, affordable or public housing, eviction protections, food programs. These aren't radical ideas, these are the only way forward.
This youthful exuberance has its benefits but it also has more than its share of idealism, naïveté and general lack of big picture considerations.
The survivalist movement is a great example of this.
Total garbage software that essentially functions as a billing tool.
This works out to around 0.2% (1 in 2000) which is spectacularly poor odds for modern aviation where the typical risk of a crash on a single commercial airliner is around 1 in 5 million (less than 1 in 100 000 for 10 flights per year over 50 years - so basically 50 times less safe).
So glad our corporate surveillance masters are teaming up to infiltrate every aspect of our existence.
The bigger issue is how did the vendor or IT department responsible for the network allow routine internet access to interface with critical healthcare or financial infrastructure? (You don't have to be looking at porn to be on the wrong side of a phishing scam).
Clearly you've had bad experiences with (some) doctors - generalizing that experience and extrapolating it to the issue of IT security is deeply flawed reasoning.
1) I have never seen a health care organization ANYWHERE where the physicians determine the IT policy (including and especially the IT security policy).
2) Universally, healthcare organizations use the bloated garbage that gets passed off as EMRs and affiliated garbage software. None of this is up to physicians. It's up to the administrative and bureaucratic parasites that have infested healthcare at every level and based largely (I assume) on crony relationships, because it's certainly not based on competence.
3)Healthcare IT is the most abysmal software anyone anywhere has ever devised to perform any task. Systems like EPIC are bloated, barely functional trash that systems have wasted billions of dollars on. The various components of departmental IT do not co-ordinate with one another, crash on a daily basis, are not fit for purpose and would embarrass engineers in any other industry.
It comes as no surprise that security for these systems is piss-poor, just like everything else about these systems. Blaming doctors for this administrative mess, whilst not unexpected, is disingenuous at best (of course this is what healthcare administration excel at - making a mess and blaming physicians).
I also interact with AI/ML researchers all the time. Most of them are typically some combination of: 1. Poorly informed about the appropriate context and utility of medical imaging. 2. Trying as hard as they can to push AI/ML as the most important technology in medicine today. 3. Pursuing a very task-specific project which they claim is massively generalizable in some (incorrect) way.
In fact, the area of medicine most in need of 'disruption' imho is healthcare enterprise software. Doctors are literally killing themselves because the interfaces they have to deal with on a daily basis are so appallingly poor.
Of course, the solution is less technological than political as it wouldn't take much to come up with better software than the legacy alternatives but you'd have a very hard time getting past the entrenched relationship interests of crony bureaucrats that run hospital administrations.
I wonder how long people think about these sorts of claims before posting them.
Do they really think an AI is more likely to appropriately interpret an MRI scan (and all the anatomic, physics and pathophysiological data therein contained) in the context of a specific clinical work-up more easily than triage patients the way a family practitioner or ER doctor does?
I wasn't just commenting on the abstract presented. I was commenting on the comments I see here, as well as comments I see related to similar papers all the time.
I also interact with AI/ML researchers all the time. Most of them are typically some combination of: 1. Poorly informed about the appropriate context and utility of medical imaging. 2. Trying as hard as they can to push AI/ML as the most important technology in medicine today. 3. Pursuing a very task-specific project which they claim is massively generalizable in some (incorrect) way.
1) Mammograms are not interpreted in a vacuum. In fact mammograms are usually the first in a long line of tests before a breast cancer or other diagnosis is ultimately made. In fact, it's probably more accurate to refer to mammography as a screening exam for which patients need a biopsy rather than a diagnostic test for cancer (there are rare exceptions, but overall this point holds).
2) Speaking frankly as a radiologist myself, tests like mammograms aren't even that good in terms of overall diagnosis. Thats why ultrasound, tomosynthesis and MRI are often used as supporting evidence and/or alternative exams.
3) There is controversy over the overall utility of mammograms, particularly in the screening context. Radiologists more than anyone would like the sensitivity and specificity of these studies to be higher.
It strikes me that the people that push these "radiology is ripe for disruption" or "AI outperforms radiologists" hyperbolic arguments are clearly people that have never seen the inside of a clinic. I'm sure they love this rhetoric though when pitching to VCs or sitting around the conference table coming up with 'breakthrough ideas' to turn into power-points for the other administrators.
As just one example, I was unable to start my new model 3 on a cold morning after owning it for 3 months (which in itself is horrendous). The entire system shut down and would not start. This was particularly problematic for me as I am required to get into the hospital in under 30 minutes in order to treat stroke patients. As such I ended up having to use an uber to make it to my surgical list.
As is typical for uber, it was impossible to get hold of a human to resolve the situation and the replies (from whatever it is that replies to you on their app) refused to help me unless I waited at my car for their service to show up.
When I finally got hold of someone I was told that in order to prevent this, I should prewarm the car using the app prior to using the car. No-one ever explained this to me prior to this happening.
I would like to say this has been the only incident but there have been innumerable problems at every point as a new owner.