2016: @GeoffreyHinton says we should stop training radiologists, because radiologists will soon be replaced by deep learning
2019: There is a shortage of radiologists. # replaced ≈ 0
What did Hinton miss?
by @garymarcus & @MaxALittlehttps://www.statnews.com/2019/10/23/advancing-ai-health-care-trust/ …
-
Fair point. But the basis of your article is that he predicted radiologists would be replaced within 10 years, max. He simply did not say that. Besides which, his comments were <4 years ago.
curious whether you read article or just the tweet, and whether you can point to a line in the article that is inaccurate. i stand by my interpretation of the quote; certainly it represents how it was widely perceived.
-
-
Ok, read it. Good article. One point: all those rads that say AI can only assist not replace, because they have deep knowledge of disease process, etc? None of them consider the idea that they could therefore be replaced by, say, a pulmonologist + AI, or an oncologist + AI.
-
We should not stop training radiologists, not in 3, 5 or 10 years. However, maybe we should start training radiologists with a good understanding of how AI algorithms work, including their strengths and limitations.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Haven’t yet, but will. Promise. :) But my objection, again, isn’t against any conclusion you might have reached in the article. It’s that the premise of the article (that he predicted demise of rads in <=10 yrs) is false.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
By the way, seems strange to hear popularity = truth argument coming from an AI iconoclast whose whole book flies against widely popular opinions of deep learning.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.