The Basque Country is implementing Quantus Skin in its health clinics after an investment of 1.6 million euros. Specialists criticise the artificial intelligence developed by the Asisa subsidiary due to its “poor” and “dangerous” results. The algorithm has been trained only with data from white patients.
If someone with dark skin gets a real doctor to look at them, because it’s known that this thing doesn’t work at all in their case, then they are better off, really.
It’s, going to erase me?
Who said that?
i only see a blank comment.
Though I get the point, I would caution against calling “racism!” on AI not being able to detect molea or cancers well on people with darker skin; its harder to see darker areas on darker skins. That is physics, not racism
The racism is in training on white patients only, not in the abilities of the AI in this case.
It’s still not racism. The article itself says there is a lack of diversity in the training data. Training data will consist of 100% “obvious” pictures of skin cancers which is most books and online images I’ve looked into seems to be majority fair skinned individuals.
“…such algorithms perform worse on black people, which is not due to technical problems, but to a lack of diversity in the training data…”
Calling out things as racist really works to mask what a useful tool this could be to help screen for skin cancers.
it isn’t racism it is [describes racism]
Training data will consist of 100% “obvious” pictures of skin cancers
Only if you’re using shitty training data
if only you read more than three sentences you’d see the problem is with the training data. instead you chose to make sure no one said the R word. ben shapiro would be proud
Think more about the intended audience.
This isn’t about melanoma. The media has been pushing yellow journalism like this regarding AI since it became big.
It’s similar to how right wing media would push headlines about immigrant invasions. Hating on AI is the left’s version of illegal immigrants.
Reading the article, it seems like badly regulated procurement processes with a company that did not meet the criteria to begin with.
Poor results on people with darker skin colour are a known issue. However, the article says its training data containes ONLY white patients. The issue is not hate against AI, it’s about what the tools can do with obviously problematic data.
Unless the article is lying, these are valid concerns that have nothing to do with hating on AI, it has all to do with the minimal requirements for health AI tools.
Do you think any of these articles are lying or that these are not intended to generate certain sentiments towards immigrants?
Are they valid concerns to be aware of?
The reason I’m asking is because could you not say the same about any of these articles even though we all know exactly what the NY Post is doing?
Compare it to posts on Lemmy with AI topics. They’re the same.
Media forcing opinions using the same framework they always use.
Regardless if it’s the right or the left. Media is owned by people lik the Koch and bannons and Murdoch’s even left leading media.
They don’t want the left using AI or building on it. They’ve been pushing a ton of articles to left leaning spaces using the same framework they use when it’s election season and are looking to spin up the right wing base. It’s all about taking jobs, threats to children, status quo.
