> i dont know shit about anesthesiology, if an algorithm weights my comment discussing anesthesiology with the same weight as an actual widely peer-respected an

> i dont know shit about anesthesiology, if an algorithm weights my comment discussing anesthesiology with the same weight as an actual widely peer-respected anesthesiologist, something is _severely_ broken. this type of thing is happening across the board. Facts are one type of content, but what about these types of prompts? * An an anesthesiologist walks into a bar… * I’d rather be an anesthesiologist than a … * My recent experience with an anesthesiologist was … * Can someone please explain why an anesthesiologist … Also, the problem with a peer-reviewed domain expert approach is that if we took a collection of randomly sampled domain experts from 100 years ago, many might have opinions and theories about their own area of expertise that we consider abhorrent or factually wrong today. It’s only through loudly questioning those enshrined, institutional beliefs that we make progress. And often times those questions are raised by those folks that experience the outcome of those theories. It’s one thing to be a peer reviewed domain expert operating in the realm of controlled studies and intellectual thought. It’s another to be a human being with one life to live, who’s on the receiving / implementation end of these theories.