Not the first time fuckwit has done this, as article notes. Just saber-rattling bullshit. Usually means Russia is desperate.

Just like CK or Dick Cheney, my sympathy had already been reserved for other countless victims of conservative ignorance and greed.

To celebrate or not; one certainly is not obligated to mourn.

Your point is completely valid but what’s scary to me is that very much in name of, “Info Wars” and Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, perception becomes reality.

In short, they know they fully in control of the biggest megaphones of media and so can mold reality however they like

Oh yeah I knew this but I’d love to see the standoff between Netherlands and the 119+ other signatories versus the USA having arrested Trump. Granted, I think he’d have to be out of office and a Democratic president in charge to look the other way, but I’m not when sure another republican president would do much for him.

Ah well it’s a pipedream anyway.

This will bring ICC charges.

How poetic would it be that Jack Smith goes back to working for the ICC where he locked up war lords, only to lock up Trump.

I’m going to huff that hopium, leave me be.

I think the public display for fear was the point, but it backfired tremendously. Some policy goon probably finally broke through that they aren’t able to rig the midterm elections quickly enough and the polling is collapsing.

How about instead you provide your prompt and its response. Then you and I shall have discussion on whether or not that prompt was biased and you were hallucinating when writing it, or indeed the LLM was at fault — shall we?

At the end of day, you still have not elucidated why — especially within the purview of my demonstration of its usage in conversation elsewhere and its success in a similar implementation — it cannot simply be used as double-checker of sorts, since ultimately, the human doctor would go, “well now, this is just absurd” since after all, they are the expert to begin with — you following?

So, naturally, if it’s a second set of LLM eyes to double-check one’s work, either the doctor will go, “Oh wow, yes, I definitely blundered when I ordered that and was confusing charting with another patient” or “Oh wow, the AI is completely off here and I will NOT take its advice to alter my charting!”

Somewhat ironically, I gather the impression one has a particular prejudice against these emergent GPTs and that is in fact biasing your perception of their potential.

EDIT: Ah, just noticed my tag for you. Say no more. Have a nice day.

The difference is that the practitioner can distinguish the difference from hallucination from fact while an LLM cannot.

Sorry, what do you mean by this? Can you elaborate? Hundreds of thousands of medical errors occur annually from exhausted medical workers doing something in error and ultimately “hallucinating,” and not having caught themselves. Might, like a spellchecker, an AI have tapped them on the proverbial shoulder to alert them of such an error?

A supercomputer is only as powerful as it’s programming.

As a software engineer, I understand that; but the capacity to aggregate large amounts of data and to provide a probabilistic determination on risk-assessment simply isn’t something a single, exhausted physician’s mind can do in a moment’s notice no differently than calculating Pi to a million digits in a second. I’m not even opposed to more specialized LLMs being deployed as a check to this, of course.

Example: I know most logical fallacies pretty well, and I’m fairly well versed on current-events, US history, civics, politics, etc. But from time-to-time, I have an LLM analyze conversations with, say, Trump supporters to double-check not only their writing, but my own. It has pointed out fallacies in my own writing that I myself missed; it has noted deviations in facts and provided sources that upon closer analysis, I agreed with. Such a demonstration of auditing suggests it can equally be quite rapidly applied to healthcare in a similar manner, with some additional training material perhaps, but under the same principle.

That’s really interesting, thanks. I’m curious how long ago this was as neither I nor my partner (who works in the clinical side of healthcare) have seen anything deployed at least at the facilities we’ve been at.

I couldn’t have said it better myself and completely agree. Use as an assistant; just not the main driver or final decision-maker.

But doctors and nurses’ minds effectively hallucinate just the same and are prone to even the most trivial of brain farts like fumbling basic math or language slip-ups. We can’t underestimate the capacity to have the strengths of a supercomputer at least acting as a double-checker on charting, can we?

Accuracy of LLMs is largely dependent upon the learning material used, along with the rules-based (declarative language) pipeline implemented. Little different than the quality of an education that a human mind receives if they go to Trump University versus John Hopkins.

Do you know of a specific software that double-checks charting by physicians and nurses and orders for labs, procedures relative to patient symptoms or lab values, etc., and returns some sort of probablistic analysis of their ailments, or identifies potential medical error decision-making? Genuine question because at least with my experience in the industry I haven’t, but I also haven’t worked with Epic software specifically.

Remember IBM’s Dr. Watson? I do think an AI double-checking and advising audits of patient charts in a hospital or physicians office could be hugely beneficial. Medical errors account for many outright deaths let alone other fuckups.

I know this isn’t what Oz is proposing, which sounds very dumb.

They know they just seeded the next several generations of terrorists with the regional destabilization they caused. Time to try finding a new solution for the problem they made…

He never once had the support of half or more of the country. Ever. Either by way of votes or approval rating.

I say Vance being the best they got could be considered hilarious, but then I said the same fucking thing about Trump.

And now I’m seeing a huge surge in astroturfing trying to shoehorn Newsom in as the nominee. It’s like we never learn.

Friendly reminder that their bullshit excuse of not getting a comment from the White House is completely irrelevant. Respectable journalist outfits request comment but if declined or ignored, they proceed anyway.

That would otherwise suggest a corrupt White House could tank any story they disliked by just refusing to comment. Connect the touching dots.

Obama and Biden should in unison say the conman has ODS and BDS.

You can have a fair and equitable court system, or you can have a fast one; rarely if ever both. True justice tends to be slow and steady and helps to account for public witch-hunts and reduce risk of someone innocent being wrongfully convicted. People always say, “Yeah well this one is obvious!” but that’s not how justice works. It must be absolute. It must be there for the lowest of hanging fruit if it is to be there for the more nuanced cases just the same.

On the other hand, sadly, a slow and unfair one are not mutually-exclusive.

No good comes from this. This is the equivalent threatening or intending for violence.

And yet, I’m told by another user, a free speech absolutist, that this is absolutely normal and should be protected.