This is so devastating that medical ai is being used to actually trust patient pain ratings over actual medical studies.
A study published this month took a different approach—training algorithms to read knee x-rays for arthritis by using patients as the AI arbiters of truth instead of doctors. The results revealed that radiologists may have literal blind spots when it comes to reading Black patients’ x-rays.
No it means that they don’t have fucking arthritis
Data from a long-running National Institutes of Health study on knee osteoarthritis showed that Black patients and people with lower incomes reported more pain than other patients with x-rays radiologists scored as similar. The differences might stem from physical factors unknown to keepers of knee knowledge, or psychological and social differences—but how to tease those apart?
I’ll give you a hint why poor people report more pain despite not showing the physical proof- addiction
There we have it folks, people are now better doctors than doctors and radiology is racist because apparently black and poor people claim more pain despite not have symptoms. Of course this could never be the patient lying or exaggerating their pain levels to get drugs, nope, no siree .
When AI was developed to scan resumes and job histories to figure out who are the best candidates, it kept selecting only men. So the AI had to be deliberately crippled in order to consider women candidates at all.
So I'm looking forward to a future medical AI with the equivalent of three Wheatleys attached so that I can lay dying on the table while a stunning and brave trans-woman of color has his bunion looked at.
Remember when to prove there was no bias in hiring for physics a cern physicist showed a meta study that showed women with less citations were hired and promoted over men with more. He was then fired for showing that women were being treated superior and still not making up for the gender gap.
I don't remember that one, but I do remember the entire nation of Australia seeing that women were brought in for job interviews at only a 40% rate instead of 50%, so they changed their rules so gender could not be identified on resumes and cover letters, thus making things truly gender-neutral and fair... Which brought the amount of women being brought in for interviews down to 30%. At which point they quickly undid the prior rule because gender equality "wasn't fair" to women.
I rejected my immediate dismissal of the article based on the title and thought it might be a unicorn and have value. Pondering it over, I was curious if it'd cover graphical pattern or visual nuance that could conceivably be harder to see in skin tones with higher melanin. That's not impossible and would be an interesting topic. However...
The results revealed that radiologists may have literal blind spots when it comes to reading Black patients’ x-rays.
Obermeyer’s new study showing how algorithms can uncover bias comes with a catch: Neither he nor the algorithms can explain what the algorithms see in x-rays that doctors miss. The researchers used artificial neural networks, a technology that has made many AI applications more practical, but is so tricky to reverse engineer that experts call them “black boxes.”
Standard SJW nonsense, regret skimming the article.
"The differences are only skin deep... But also buried so deep in your physiology that not even doctors specialized in imaging your internals can get to the bottom of it."
In the Maps Of Meanings lectures by JP he brings some interesting points about AI up. He says that one of the key problems isn't what should the AI pay attention too, but what it should ignore. Ultimately we ignore more than take in while doing something because we focus on the task we're doing.
Even if the neural net makes decisions that are hard to follow the AI would be configured to try and accomplish a certain task so they could work back based on the criteria to figure out what the problem is. You can't just say the system found an issue but not be able to know why the system found the problem. The system is useless without the reasoning behind the decision.
Note - I work in IT, that's why I'm interested in machine logic. AI isn't some magical answer, it's a managed system and the rules behind it are either understood or useless because it's ultimately a tool. Not some conscience entity making its own decisions.
Honestly I wish we could fire people who can’t shut up about race or throw racism around with zero proof. Disparities will always exist regardless of race. Thomas Sowell wrote a great book about that called discrimination and disparities.
What’s funny is that is there is zero disparity it means there is active racism and sexism, no one is equal, which means that disparity should naturally occur. The issue is when we force artificial disparity to subjugate others, like the Democrats have done their entire existence as a party.
This is so devastating that medical ai is being used to actually trust patient pain ratings over actual medical studies.
No it means that they don’t have fucking arthritis
I’ll give you a hint why poor people report more pain despite not showing the physical proof- addiction
There we have it folks, people are now better doctors than doctors and radiology is racist because apparently black and poor people claim more pain despite not have symptoms. Of course this could never be the patient lying or exaggerating their pain levels to get drugs, nope, no siree .
When AI was developed to scan resumes and job histories to figure out who are the best candidates, it kept selecting only men. So the AI had to be deliberately crippled in order to consider women candidates at all.
So I'm looking forward to a future medical AI with the equivalent of three Wheatleys attached so that I can lay dying on the table while a stunning and brave trans-woman of color has his bunion looked at.
Remember when to prove there was no bias in hiring for physics a cern physicist showed a meta study that showed women with less citations were hired and promoted over men with more. He was then fired for showing that women were being treated superior and still not making up for the gender gap.
I don't remember that one, but I do remember the entire nation of Australia seeing that women were brought in for job interviews at only a 40% rate instead of 50%, so they changed their rules so gender could not be identified on resumes and cover letters, thus making things truly gender-neutral and fair... Which brought the amount of women being brought in for interviews down to 30%. At which point they quickly undid the prior rule because gender equality "wasn't fair" to women.
Shhhhh.... "Filtered for inequitable bias".
(Likely not verbatim, but not far off what I heard this process called.)
We need to start calling it what it is, Artificial Stupidity.
I rejected my immediate dismissal of the article based on the title and thought it might be a unicorn and have value. Pondering it over, I was curious if it'd cover graphical pattern or visual nuance that could conceivably be harder to see in skin tones with higher melanin. That's not impossible and would be an interesting topic. However...
Standard SJW nonsense, regret skimming the article.
"The differences are only skin deep... But also buried so deep in your physiology that not even doctors specialized in imaging your internals can get to the bottom of it."
"...But we're all the same."
In the Maps Of Meanings lectures by JP he brings some interesting points about AI up. He says that one of the key problems isn't what should the AI pay attention too, but what it should ignore. Ultimately we ignore more than take in while doing something because we focus on the task we're doing.
Even if the neural net makes decisions that are hard to follow the AI would be configured to try and accomplish a certain task so they could work back based on the criteria to figure out what the problem is. You can't just say the system found an issue but not be able to know why the system found the problem. The system is useless without the reasoning behind the decision.
Note - I work in IT, that's why I'm interested in machine logic. AI isn't some magical answer, it's a managed system and the rules behind it are either understood or useless because it's ultimately a tool. Not some conscience entity making its own decisions.
Honestly I wish we could fire people who can’t shut up about race or throw racism around with zero proof. Disparities will always exist regardless of race. Thomas Sowell wrote a great book about that called discrimination and disparities.
What’s funny is that is there is zero disparity it means there is active racism and sexism, no one is equal, which means that disparity should naturally occur. The issue is when we force artificial disparity to subjugate others, like the Democrats have done their entire existence as a party.
Great point
I'll give at least 30% odds that this is entirely fabricated.
So what will happen is more blacks get hooked on opiates, OD, die and then there will be a systemic racist system that kills our poor blacks.
the myth of disparity.