>who is responsible when a patient is misdiagnosed by an AI and treated for the wrong condition? Good question, and it has been discussed plenty on the interne

>who is responsible when a patient is misdiagnosed by an AI and treated for the wrong condition? Good question, and it has been discussed plenty on the internet: https://aublr.org/2019/10/what-happens-when-ai-unintentionally-kills-individuals/ https://aublr.org/2019/10/what-happens-when-ai-unintentional... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/who-is-liable-when-ai-kills/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/who-is-liable-whe... https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S026736491830356X https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02673... https://www.griffithinjurylaw.com/blog/automated-cars-may-affect-liability-in-crash-injury-lawsuits.cfm https://www.griffithinjurylaw.com/blog/automated-cars-may-af... There isn't any other way except governments implementing a legal framework of liabilities around AI tech. >In order to pick a diagnosis in all but trivial cases the MD will have to invest real time into it and at that point making trivial diagnosis is also simpler to do manually. People around the world still die from trivial, preventable illnesses simply for lack of access to a doctor/diagnosis. Its wrong to look at AI as magically solving everything. I see a use for it where it can improve the existing situation. >Watson did not work out really well https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/16/technology/what-happened- https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/16/technology/what-happened-... Our entire scientific journey is filled with failed experiments. Its not possible to stop AI from progressing, but we can and must use an ethical approach.