4 ms·

I'm impressed. I gave the same prompt to opus, gpt-4, and this model. I'm very impressed with the quality. I feel like it addresses my ask better than the ot

by swalsh 2y ago

I'm impressed. I gave the same prompt to opus, gpt-4, and this model. I'm very impressed with the quality. I feel like it addresses my ask better than the other 2 models. GPT2-Chatbot: https://pastebin.com/vpYvTf3T https://pastebin.com/vpYvTf3T Claude: https://pastebin.com/SzNbAaKP https://pastebin.com/SzNbAaKP GPT-4: https://pastebin.com/D60fjEVR https://pastebin.com/D60fjEVR Prompt: I am a senate aid, my political affliation does not matter. My goal is to once and for all fix the American healthcare system. Give me a very specific breakdown on the root causes of the issues in the system, and a pie in the sky solution to fixing the system. Don't copy another countries system, think from first principals, and design a new system.

HDThoreaun 2y ago
They all did pretty well tbh. GPT2 didnt talk about moving away from fee for service which I think the evidence shows is the best idea, the other 2 did. GPT2 did have some other good ideas that the others didnt touch on though.
- swalsh 2y ago
  I agree, all 3 were great viable answers to my question. But Claude and GPT-4 felt a lot more like a regurgitation of the same suggestions people have proposed for years (ie, their training material). The GPT2, while similar felt more like it tried to approach the question from first principals. IE, it laid out a set of root causes, and reasoned a solution from there, which was subtly my primary ask.
  - hackerlight 2y ago
    "- Establish regional management divisions for localized control and adjustments, while maintaining overall national standards." This was a nice detail, applying an understanding of the local knowledge problem.
riwsky 2y ago
Is that verbatim the prompt you put? You misused “aid” for “aide”, “principals” for “principles”, “countries” for “country’s”, and typo’d “affiliation”—which is all certainly fine for an internet comment, but would break the illusion of some rigorous policy discussion going on in a way that might affect our parrot friends.
- rhodo 2y ago
  Real humans misspell things, don’t be a dick
ETH_start 2y ago
The solutions the LLMs offer show that they are just reflections of conventional wisdom. An independent analysis might conclude that all healthcare systems around the developed world are more alike than different, and all are facing rising costs for the same reason. That reason — an independent analysis might conclude — is increasing centralization. See the biggest shift in the US healthcare system over the last 50 years for example: There was a 3,200 percent increase in the number of healthcare administrators between 1975 and 2010, compared to a 150% increase in physicians, due to an increasing number of regulations: https://www.athenahealth.com/knowledge-hub/practice-management/expert-forum-rise-and-rise-healthcare-administrator https://www.athenahealth.com/knowledge-hub/practice-manageme... >Supporters say the growing number of administrators is needed to keep pace with the drastic changes in healthcare delivery during that timeframe, particularly change driven by technology and by ever-more-complex regulations. (To cite just a few industry-disrupting regulations, consider the Prospective Payment System of 1983 [1]; the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act of 1996 [2]; and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Act of 2009.) [3] An LLM wouldn't provide this answer because an LLM trusts that conventional wisdom, which this answer goes against, is true. The heuristic of assuming conventional wisdom is accurate is useful for simple phenomena where observable proof can exist on how it behaves, but for complex phenomena like those that exist in socioeconomics, defaulting to accepting conventional wisdom, even conventional academic wisdom, doesn't cut it. [1] https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/prospective-payment-systems https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/prospective-payment-sys... [2] https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-reg... [3] https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/hitech-act-enforcement-interim-final-rule/index.html https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/h...

by swalsh 2y ago

HDThoreaun 2y ago

They all did pretty well tbh. GPT2 didnt talk about moving away from fee for service which I think the evidence shows is the best idea, the other 2 did. GPT2 did have some other good ideas that the others didnt touch on though.

swalsh 2y ago
I agree, all 3 were great viable answers to my question. But Claude and GPT-4 felt a lot more like a regurgitation of the same suggestions people have proposed for years (ie, their training material). The GPT2, while similar felt more like it tried to approach the question from first principals. IE, it laid out a set of root causes, and reasoned a solution from there, which was subtly my primary ask.
- hackerlight 2y ago
  "- Establish regional management divisions for localized control and adjustments, while maintaining overall national standards." This was a nice detail, applying an understanding of the local knowledge problem.

riwsky 2y ago

Is that verbatim the prompt you put? You misused “aid” for “aide”, “principals” for “principles”, “countries” for “country’s”, and typo’d “affiliation”—which is all certainly fine for an internet comment, but would break the illusion of some rigorous policy discussion going on in a way that might affect our parrot friends.

rhodo 2y ago
Real humans misspell things, don’t be a dick

ETH_start 2y ago

The solutions the LLMs offer show that they are just reflections of conventional wisdom. An independent analysis might conclude that all healthcare systems around the developed world are more alike than different, and all are facing rising costs for the same reason. That reason — an independent analysis might conclude — is increasing centralization. See the biggest shift in the US healthcare system over the last 50 years for example: There was a 3,200 percent increase in the number of healthcare administrators between 1975 and 2010, compared to a 150% increase in physicians, due to an increasing number of regulations: https://www.athenahealth.com/knowledge-hub/practice-management/expert-forum-rise-and-rise-healthcare-administrator https://www.athenahealth.com/knowledge-hub/practice-manageme... >Supporters say the growing number of administrators is needed to keep pace with the drastic changes in healthcare delivery during that timeframe, particularly change driven by technology and by ever-more-complex regulations. (To cite just a few industry-disrupting regulations, consider the Prospective Payment System of 1983 [1]; the Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act of 1996 [2]; and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Act of 2009.) [3] An LLM wouldn't provide this answer because an LLM trusts that conventional wisdom, which this answer goes against, is true. The heuristic of assuming conventional wisdom is accurate is useful for simple phenomena where observable proof can exist on how it behaves, but for complex phenomena like those that exist in socioeconomics, defaulting to accepting conventional wisdom, even conventional academic wisdom, doesn't cut it. [1] https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/prospective-payment-systems https://www.cms.gov/medicare/payment/prospective-payment-sys... [2] https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-reg... [3] https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/hitech-act-enforcement-interim-final-rule/index.html https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/h...