5 ms·

> Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) rejected your resume before a human even saw it. Or ima

> Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) rejected your resume before a human even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a machine you can’t question. I wonder when/if the opposite will be as much of an article hook: "Imagine applying for a job, only to find out that a human rejected your resume before an algorithm powered by artificial intelligence (AI) even saw it. Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a human you can’t question." The implicit assumption is that it's preferred that humans do the work. In the first case, probably most would assume an AI is... ruthless? biased? Both exist for humans too. Not that the current state of AI resume processing is necessarily "good". In the second, I don't understand as no competent licensed doctor chooses the treatment options (absent an emergency); they presumably know the only reasonable options, discuss them with the patient, answer questions, and the patient chooses.

leereeves 1y ago
> In the second, I don't understand as no competent licensed doctor chooses the treatment options (absent an emergency); they presumably know the only reasonable options, discuss them with the patient, answer questions, and the patient chooses. I wish that were the case, but in my experience it is not. Every time I've seen a doctor, they offered only one medication, unless I requested a different one.
- linsomniac 1y ago
  >they offered only one medication I've had a few doctors offer me alternatives and talk through the options, which I'll agree is rare. It sure has been nice when it happened. One time I did push back on one of the doctor's recommendations: I was with my mom and the doctor said he was going to prescribe some medication. I said "I presume you're already aware of this but she's been on that before and reacted poorly to it and we took her off it because of that. The doctor was NOT aware of that and prescribed something else. I sure was glad to be there and be able to catch that.
- zdragnar 1y ago
  There's a few possible reasons this can happen. First is that the side effect profile of one option is much better known or tolerated, so the doctor will default to it. Second is that the doctor knows the insurance company / government plan will require attempting to treat a condition with a standard cheaper treatment before they will pay for the newer, more expensive option. There's always the third case where the doctor is overworked, lazy or prideful and doesn't consider the patient may have some input on which treatment they would like, since they didn't go to medical school and what would they know anyway?
userbinator 1y ago
Humans can be held accountable. Machines can't. AI dilutes responsibility.
- kevmo314 1y ago
  AI didn't bring anything new to the table, this is a human problem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0YGZPycMEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0YGZPycMEU
  - whilenot-dev 1y ago
    GenAI absolutely brings something new to the table! These models should be perceived as human-like intelligence when it's time to bring value to shareholders, but are designed to provide just enough non-determinism to avoid responsibilities. All problems are human and nothing will ever change that. Just imagine the effects anyone is facing when being affected by something like the British Post Office scandal[0], only this time it's impossible to comprehend any faults in the software system. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal
- tbrownaw 1y ago
  How fortunate that AIs are tools operated by humans, and can't cause worse responsibility issues than when a human employee is required to blindly follow a canned procedure.
  - whilenot-dev 1y ago
    I can't tell if this is sarcasm... GenAI interfaces are rolled out as chat products to end users, they just evaporate this last responsibility that remains on any human employee. This responsiblity shift from employee to end user is made on purpose, "worse responsibility issues" are real and well designed to be on the customer side.
- eWeSaYYY 1y ago
  [dead]
linsomniac 1y ago
>Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a human you can’t question That really struck a chord with me. I've been struggling with chronic sinusitis, without really much success. I had ChatGPT o3 do a deep research on my specific symptoms and test results, including a negative allergy (on my shoulder) test but that the doctor observed allergic reactions in my sinuses. ChatGPT seemed to do a great job, and in particular came up with a pointer to an NIH reference that showed 25% of patients in a study showed "local rhinitis" (isolated allergic reactions) in their sinuses that didn't show elsewhere. I asked my ENT if I could be experiencing a local reaction in my sinuses that didn't show up in my shoulder, and he completely dismissed that idea with "That's not how allergies work, they cause a reaction all over the body." However, I will say that I've been taking one of the second gen allergy meds for the last 2 weeks and the sinus issues have been resolved and staying resolved, but I do need another couple months to really have a good data point. The funny thing is that this Dr is a evening programmer, and every time I see him we are talking about how amazing the different LLMs are for programming. He also really seems to keep up with new ENT tech, he was telling me all about a new "KPAP" algorithm that they are working on FDA approval for and apparently is much less annoying to use than CPAP. But he didn't have any interest in looking at the at the NIH reference.
- sumeno 1y ago
  > I do need another couple months to really have a good data point. You need another couple months to really have a good anecdote.
  - linsomniac 1y ago
    I think whether I'm cured or not only slightly minimizes the story of a physician who discounted something that seemingly impacts 25% of patients... It's also interesting to me that ChatGPT came up with research supporting an answer to my primary question, but the Dr. did not. The point being that there's a lot that the LLMs can do in concert with physicians, discounting either one is not useful or interesting.

leereeves 1y ago

> In the second, I don't understand as no competent licensed doctor chooses the treatment options (absent an emergency); they presumably know the only reasonable options, discuss them with the patient, answer questions, and the patient chooses. I wish that were the case, but in my experience it is not. Every time I've seen a doctor, they offered only one medication, unless I requested a different one.

linsomniac 1y ago
>they offered only one medication I've had a few doctors offer me alternatives and talk through the options, which I'll agree is rare. It sure has been nice when it happened. One time I did push back on one of the doctor's recommendations: I was with my mom and the doctor said he was going to prescribe some medication. I said "I presume you're already aware of this but she's been on that before and reacted poorly to it and we took her off it because of that. The doctor was NOT aware of that and prescribed something else. I sure was glad to be there and be able to catch that.
zdragnar 1y ago
There's a few possible reasons this can happen. First is that the side effect profile of one option is much better known or tolerated, so the doctor will default to it. Second is that the doctor knows the insurance company / government plan will require attempting to treat a condition with a standard cheaper treatment before they will pay for the newer, more expensive option. There's always the third case where the doctor is overworked, lazy or prideful and doesn't consider the patient may have some input on which treatment they would like, since they didn't go to medical school and what would they know anyway?

userbinator 1y ago

Humans can be held accountable. Machines can't. AI dilutes responsibility.

kevmo314 1y ago
AI didn't bring anything new to the table, this is a human problem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0YGZPycMEU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0YGZPycMEU
- whilenot-dev 1y ago
  GenAI absolutely brings something new to the table! These models should be perceived as human-like intelligence when it's time to bring value to shareholders, but are designed to provide just enough non-determinism to avoid responsibilities. All problems are human and nothing will ever change that. Just imagine the effects anyone is facing when being affected by something like the British Post Office scandal[0], only this time it's impossible to comprehend any faults in the software system. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal
tbrownaw 1y ago
How fortunate that AIs are tools operated by humans, and can't cause worse responsibility issues than when a human employee is required to blindly follow a canned procedure.
- whilenot-dev 1y ago
  I can't tell if this is sarcasm... GenAI interfaces are rolled out as chat products to end users, they just evaporate this last responsibility that remains on any human employee. This responsiblity shift from employee to end user is made on purpose, "worse responsibility issues" are real and well designed to be on the customer side.
eWeSaYYY 1y ago
[dead]

linsomniac 1y ago

>Or imagine visiting a doctor where treatment options are chosen by a human you can’t question That really struck a chord with me. I've been struggling with chronic sinusitis, without really much success. I had ChatGPT o3 do a deep research on my specific symptoms and test results, including a negative allergy (on my shoulder) test but that the doctor observed allergic reactions in my sinuses. ChatGPT seemed to do a great job, and in particular came up with a pointer to an NIH reference that showed 25% of patients in a study showed "local rhinitis" (isolated allergic reactions) in their sinuses that didn't show elsewhere. I asked my ENT if I could be experiencing a local reaction in my sinuses that didn't show up in my shoulder, and he completely dismissed that idea with "That's not how allergies work, they cause a reaction all over the body." However, I will say that I've been taking one of the second gen allergy meds for the last 2 weeks and the sinus issues have been resolved and staying resolved, but I do need another couple months to really have a good data point. The funny thing is that this Dr is a evening programmer, and every time I see him we are talking about how amazing the different LLMs are for programming. He also really seems to keep up with new ENT tech, he was telling me all about a new "KPAP" algorithm that they are working on FDA approval for and apparently is much less annoying to use than CPAP. But he didn't have any interest in looking at the at the NIH reference.

sumeno 1y ago
> I do need another couple months to really have a good data point. You need another couple months to really have a good anecdote.
- linsomniac 1y ago
  I think whether I'm cured or not only slightly minimizes the story of a physician who discounted something that seemingly impacts 25% of patients... It's also interesting to me that ChatGPT came up with research supporting an answer to my primary question, but the Dr. did not. The point being that there's a lot that the LLMs can do in concert with physicians, discounting either one is not useful or interesting.