Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (1043133)	12/14/2017 7:44:38 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578545

I'm telling you that this is impossible with current technology. You are confusing an existing implemented system vs current technology has the pieces to enable it. We currently have the algorithms for example to do any sort of Radiology image reading, but that is not the same thing as having actually trained a system for every condition. There are currently trained systems that will beat expert Radiologists for specific conditions. So I believe I'm quite correct in stating that existing technology can basically fully replace Radiologists, even though no such fully trained system currently exists. There is not barrier to developing it, just time and $, which is why IBM has been buying up medical companies just to get their records for training. The reason AI will be used only as an assistant to humans in the USA is the legal aspect of current medical practice law. Which is why I expect the USA to lag other countries like China, who BTW recently did the first fully autonomous dental implant surgery. I expect fully autonomous surgeries on humans to generally be developed outside the USA. We will follow, not lead. To think that average highly trained individual humans can catch errors vs an AI system a few years from now is nuts. The AI system will check against your entire genome in a few years among other things.