if it wasn’t maliciously designed it’s absurdly negligent. both of which are reason enough to not use AI at all.
wouldn’t it make more sense to streamline the existing processes first before creating a traffic jam of “potential” cures? where at least the models could be trained on existing cutting edge medical research instead of flying blind and developing novel treatments and cures.
the more I think about it the more is seems plausible that the actions AI implementation takes is malicious negligence. incompetence derived from a malicious intent to do harm on someone or something.
is this the disruption AI execs were talking about?
if it wasn’t maliciously designed it’s absurdly negligent. both of which are reason enough to not use AI at all.
wouldn’t it make more sense to streamline the existing processes first before creating a traffic jam of “potential” cures? where at least the models could be trained on existing cutting edge medical research instead of flying blind and developing novel treatments and cures.
the more I think about it the more is seems plausible that the actions AI implementation takes is malicious negligence. incompetence derived from a malicious intent to do harm on someone or something.
is this the disruption AI execs were talking about?