• Aisteru@lemmy.aisteru.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Honestly? Before the AI craze, I’d have said yes, because I believe AIs tailored to do one specific thing can outperform humans. Today? I’d rather not, as I could not let go of the thought that it might be somme shitty model quickly put together by the nephew of the CEO…

  • pixeltree@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Would I trust the accuracy of the output? No, but it might be a decent warning to get tested to make sure. Would I trust a company with pictures of my genitals attached to my identity? Certainly not an AI company.

  • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Short answer, yes.

    Finding complex patterns in noisy data is an application that AI is actually well suited for. It still requires human follow-up. Anyway, human experts make mistakes in these areas as well. There is a good chance that a well designed AI could be more accurate.

    • Petter1@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      It is already more accurate, in many places in medicine 😇

    • Jesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Twitter is mostly verified dicks these days. That might be the better platform.

  • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 month ago

    Honestly? I’ve leaked pics of those voluntarily, so curiously I’d be a-okay with this one.

  • azl@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    What’s the difference between one technology you don’t understand (AI engine-assisted ) and another you don’t understand (human-staffed radiology laboratory)?

    Regardless of whether you (as a patient hopelessly unskilled in diagnosis of any condition) trust the method, you probably have some level of faith in the provider who has selected it. And, while they most likely will choose what is most beneficial to them (cost of providing accurate diagnoses vs. cost of providing less accurate diagnoses), hopefully regulatory oversight and public influence will force them to use whichever is most effective, AI or not.

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      What’s the difference between one technology you don’t understand (AI engine-assisted ) and another you don’t understand (human-staffed radiology laboratory)?

      The difference is that people think they understand AI. Even here in this thread, there are people confusing this for an LLM.

    • wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      AI: “Your penis appears to be an avocado. This is normal, and you should not be concerned. However you have 3 testicles and this should be looked into.”

      You, a female: “uhhhhhh”

      • lemmyng@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s LLM AI, but the type I’m talking about is the machine learning kind. I can envision a system that takes e.g. a sample’s test data and provides a summary, which is not far from what doctors do anyway. If you ever get a blood test’s results explained to you it’s “this value is high, which would be concerning except that this other value is not high, so you’re probably fine regarding X. However, I notice that this other value is low, and this can be an indicator of Y. I’m going to request a follow-up test regarding that.” Yes, I would trust an AI to give me that explanation, because those are very strict parameters to work with, and the input comes from a trusted source (lab results and medical training data) and not “Bob’s shrimping and hoola hoop dancing blog”.

  • solrize@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 month ago

    I dunno, maybe the diagnosis is fine but the companies that run it are sure to save copies. I can just see databreaches now, “5 million stolen dick picks uploaded to dark web”. Complete with labelling of which ones are diseased though, so that’s a help.

    • wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      If we could filter by length, girth, un/cut, ball size, hair amount, and (most importantly) diagnosis… I’m not saying I would put that tool together, but as a user

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 month ago

    Ok press the start button and slowly scan your penis, asshole and testicles. First apply included wax and pull forcefully and swiftly to remove hair.

  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    no, but not for why you think.

    because it’s far more effective to scan samples from you than whole organs.

  • nxn@biglemmowski.win
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Every passing day we delve deeper into this hole that is a cold technology driven world. Instead we really should be taking the time to share our outbreaks with friends and family.