4 ms·
> sequence it How? You’re hiding a ton of complicated work in these 2 words > AI will develop a custom therapy This statement suggests you really don’t know
by dartos 3y ago
> sequence it
How? You’re hiding a ton of complicated work in these 2 words
> AI will develop a custom therapy
This statement suggests you really don’t know what you’re talking about with regards to AI.
AI doesn’t develop treatments magically. Work needs to be don’t to curate a dataset of treatments and diseases, BUT even then AI can’t create new treatments for existing untreatable cancer as we don’t have any data to go off of.
At that point, a team of doctors might as well analyze the data themselves (probably using a more specific kind of ML technique)
You’re too cavalier in hand waving away the real work by saying things like “AI will do this. Ez. 2 years”
- ummonk 3y agoNo, you're the one who doesn't understand AI. At this point AI has demonstrated ample capability to extrapolate to out of sample data.
- e44858 3y agoAlso known as hallucination
- ben_w 3y agoNo, hallucinations are specifically when they make mistakes, even when they're more like interpolation than extrapolation. IIRC, it became a term of art during image classification AI development, where an AI might confidently assert a car was a potato, and the name stuck.
- dartos 3y agoIdk maybe splitting hairs a bit, but I’d call any output that isn’t represented or which goes against data in a training set is a hallucination. But there can be useful hallucinations. Not sure about the origin of the word, but I always thought it was marketing when chatgpt and dalle was brand new
- ummonk 3y agoI'd only call something a hallucination if the AI claims the existence of data that doesn't actually exist. Simply making an informed guess and extrapolating to data outside the training set (whether that informed guess is is correct or incorrect) is not hallucination.
- frognumber 3y ago> How? You’re hiding a ton of complicated work in these 2 words DNA sequencing has been following a Moore's Law style curve. It is cheap and easy now. > > AI will develop a custom therapy > > This statement suggests you really don’t know what you’re talking about with regards to AI. > > AI doesn’t develop treatments magically. Work needs to be don’t to curate a dataset of treatments and diseases, BUT even then AI can’t create new treatments for existing untreatable cancer as we don’t have any data to go off of. No one is suggesting it can. AI is very good at pattern-matching. There is a cookbook of techniques here: 1) Create a phage which is very good at injecting into a specific type of cell 2) Create antibodies which can latch onto a specific type of cell, virus, or cancer, so the immune system can attack them 3) Create a vaccine, which is much the same as the above None of these are hard in of themselves. What is hard is that there isn't a virus called "AIDS" or "flu" or "cold," but a very, very large family of viruses. Ditto for cancer and bacteria. This is the exact type of pattern matching problem ML excels at. Curing a specific virus isn't hard; what's hard is because of all the variations. That kind of adaptation is exactly what ML excels at. Once covid was sequenced, the actual creation of a vaccine took -- literally -- a couple of days (of work by the world's best scientists). What took much longer was validation, regulatory approval, getting manufacturing up, etc. > You’re too cavalier in hand waving away the real work by saying things like “AI will do this. Ez. 2 years” You're attacking a strawman here. Step zero of this process will be: - Collect a dataset of bacteriophage DNA and of bacteria they're good at attacking (this is a massive undertaking) - Something very similar with DNA and antigens (much of this exists / has been done, but was a huge undertaking; see "protein folding") This is a few years in itself. That's when we can start to begin training an AI. There are many other similar-sized steps along the way. "AI will cure cancer" doesn't mean "AI will cure cancer tomorrow." However, I can see all the steps along the way, and no fundamental hurdles. It's like the Apollo Program or the Manhattan Project on day 1. Yes, it's a major undertaking, but there's every reason t believe it will work. That's exciting. So far, aside from calling me an idiot, no one in this thread suggested where the flaw in the above lies (and none of the comments suggested the poster had any understanding to do so). I responded to your comment since it was closest.
- supermatt 3y agoYou really don’t understand what you are talking about. Cancer is not an infection. You can’t sequence it and treat it as you would a pathogen.