4 ms·
A more apt comparison would be seeing one of the many "we rewrote our Python app in Go and improved performance by 100x" articles, and pointing out that most of
by mjr00 3y ago
A more apt comparison would be seeing one of the many "we rewrote our Python app in Go and improved performance by 100x" articles, and pointing out that most of the improvement comes from the rewrite and not the language.
Similarly, the real moral of the article is that doctors miss things and doing independent research, whether that's ChatGPT, Google, Bing, Yandex, or reading research papers yourself is sometimes necessary.
- warent 3y agoInteresting, the way I interpret what you're saying is "Obviously ChatGPT can make an accurate medical diagnosis" in the same way of "Obviously a Python app can be rewritten in Go" Go has been around for quite a while now. ChatGPT relatively has not. If Go was still quite new and people were unsure of it, then your article headline actually does makes sense. For people such as myself, it is not obvious that ChatGPT could do such things, hence the headline is useful context.
- random_cynic 3y agoNo that's absolutely not the same as python rewritten as Go. Not just that most ordinary people don't have access to arcane medical knowledge which are hidden behind paywalls or just not available to public, arriving at a diagnosis that 17 doctors missed before from just MRI notes is not a trivial thing that can be done by just "independent research". It's absolutely disingenuous to suggest otherwise.