6 ms·
This is a very hypocritical stance in my opinion. All medical research need patient data and every newly admitted medicine has to withstand rigourous (data-dri
by jpdus 8y ago
This is a very hypocritical stance in my opinion.
All medical research need patient data and every newly admitted medicine has to withstand rigourous (data-driven) testing and this did not change with new technology at all.
Only 2 things changed:
1 - Nowadays with GDPR and increased alertness on data protection (which is a good thing in general as the possibilites evolved more quickly than the regulation), people are explicitly asked about these things.
2 - The big internet companies like Google/Facebook (which did not behave well in the past and are thus partially responsible themselves for the public mistrust in these cases) have most experience/talent for the development of ML/AI-based technologies and are deploying this in new areas like medicine.
I don't get all the negativeness here. I vastly prefer Google/Facebook working on medical progress than working on improving ad targeting. Imo they should be encouraged to use their expertise and resources for progress in these fields.
IF they are indeed found guilty of breaking promises and harvesting highly-sensitive data, shame on them. But this is not the case here.
- saiya-jin 8y ago> I vastly prefer Google/Facebook working on medical progress than working on improving ad targeting. Google's primary mission if surgically precise ad targeting (pun intended). Facebook has the same mission, that's their primary revenue stream, the difference is where their user data comes from. Any effort they do is somehow/has potential to improve their primary mission. This is just another brick in their wall. This is how (a bit educated part of) public sees G/F. Maybe the image is not 100% precise, but they do very little to correct it and be the properly honest good guys.