Limiting medical knowledge from reliable information resources would be terrible. I’d say that limiting the spread of plausible-sounding medical misinformation generated by a fancy autosuggest tool is good, though.
AI chatbots don’t actually “know” anything. They just generate the most statistically probable appearance of a response to each prompt based on their training data. They don’t tell you when something wasn’t in their training data or when there’s limited research on a subject, just give you the most statistically probable response like always, which leads to a “hallucination” that sounds true but isn’t. A tool that’s trained on MCAT testbanks and “aces” the MCAT won’t necessarily give reliable medical advice to real patient questions. Even if you gave an AI chatbot all the accurate training data in the world, it would still hallucinate information occasionally, and it wouldn’t give you any indication of when it did so. If your doctor screws you over, they can lose their license, but if ChatGPT screws you over, there’s currently very little to stop OpenAI from screwing over more people. OpenAI can just stand behind the disclaimer that says ChatGPT can make mistakes, never mind that users are treating it like a licensed medical professional. There are AI tools that are useful in medical research, but they’re a VERY different kind of AI from the AI chatbots this bill is concerned with.
If you want medical knowledge, there are tons of medical journals, news sources, blogs, and podcasts from doctors/scientists who don’t hallucinate BS when they don’t know something.
Instead of banning it then teach people how to use it and not to trust it 100% (who the hell is doing this to begin with?)
If you want medical knowledge, there are tons of medical journals, news sources, blogs, and podcasts from doctors/scientists who don’t hallucinate BS when they don’t know something.
I can ask an LLM to help me sourcing these journals and informations
Expecting people who have already taken the easy route of asking an AI to summarize medical information to do additional due diligence by reading the sources that the AI spits out is naive as fuck.
There’s a reason it became a meme for someone to Google their symptoms, click on WebMD to read about it, and then come to the conclusion that they have cancer, all without ever having seen a medical professional in the meanwhile. Do you really think these sorts of people are going to be using AI responsibly for research purposes only?
There’s a reason it became a meme for someone to Google their symptoms, click on WebMD to read about it, and then come to the conclusion that they have cancer, all without ever having seen a medical professional in the meanwhile. Do you really think these sorts of people are going to be using AI responsibly for research purposes only?
If they come to the wrong conclusion at worst they go to the hospital and someone there tells they are wrong and not to worry. We haven’t ban googling your symptoms.
AI is a tool that can provide good and bad results. To people who can’t get access to medical care easily (half of the people on the planet) it can be an useful tool to get basic medical knowledge
The issue is that AI is extremely good at sounding right, but only okay-ish at being right.
When you get good sounding information that is wrong, it can be extremely problematic and often much worse than no info at all.
Imagine LLMs aiding people with health improvements, only to lead them into health decline (actually already happening, a lot) not to mention the LLMs that further convince people of their conspiracies.
There is a reason why health professionals go through a lot of training and are under a lot of scrutiny, you wouldn’t want just any rando who thinks he know better to be your doctor
When you get good sounding information that is wrong, it can be extremely problematic and often much worse than no info at all.
A partially good answer is better than no information at all
Imagine LLMs aiding people with health improvements, only to lead them into health decline (actually already happening, a lot)
Already happening where? How can AI lead you to health decline? It cannot prescribe you medicines or do surgery on you
not to mention the LLMs that further convince people of their conspiracies.
It can also help people understanding if conspiracies are true or false, for example had you ask an LLM about this post it would have highlight to you that there’s a good chance that it is propaganda.
LLMs are NOT a reputable source of medical information. They regurgitate information from random sources, and can lead to disastrous effects when pulling from bad sources or incorrectly summarizing from a good source. At best it should exclusively provide links to sources (good or bad) and let the end user make the determination if that source can be trusted.
This isn’t limiting information at all. People can still access all the reputable sources that provide the information they are looking for. This is simply cutting out the unreliable middleman.
Good direction, but very futile considering that guardrails on LLMs are about as real as LLMs are intelligent
The nice thing about laws is that they don’t give a shit. If they say you can’t do something, it’s your problem to make sure you don’t do it.
It might not work, but it would serve to increase awareness that you absolutely cannot trust these machines to give you correct answers, ever.
Limiting the medical knowledge people can get is a good direction? really?
Limiting medical knowledge from reliable information resources would be terrible. I’d say that limiting the spread of plausible-sounding medical misinformation generated by a fancy autosuggest tool is good, though.
AI chatbots don’t actually “know” anything. They just generate the most statistically probable appearance of a response to each prompt based on their training data. They don’t tell you when something wasn’t in their training data or when there’s limited research on a subject, just give you the most statistically probable response like always, which leads to a “hallucination” that sounds true but isn’t. A tool that’s trained on MCAT testbanks and “aces” the MCAT won’t necessarily give reliable medical advice to real patient questions. Even if you gave an AI chatbot all the accurate training data in the world, it would still hallucinate information occasionally, and it wouldn’t give you any indication of when it did so. If your doctor screws you over, they can lose their license, but if ChatGPT screws you over, there’s currently very little to stop OpenAI from screwing over more people. OpenAI can just stand behind the disclaimer that says ChatGPT can make mistakes, never mind that users are treating it like a licensed medical professional. There are AI tools that are useful in medical research, but they’re a VERY different kind of AI from the AI chatbots this bill is concerned with.
If you want medical knowledge, there are tons of medical journals, news sources, blogs, and podcasts from doctors/scientists who don’t hallucinate BS when they don’t know something.
Instead of banning it then teach people how to use it and not to trust it 100% (who the hell is doing this to begin with?)
I can ask an LLM to help me sourcing these journals and informations
Expecting people who have already taken the easy route of asking an AI to summarize medical information to do additional due diligence by reading the sources that the AI spits out is naive as fuck.
There’s a reason it became a meme for someone to Google their symptoms, click on WebMD to read about it, and then come to the conclusion that they have cancer, all without ever having seen a medical professional in the meanwhile. Do you really think these sorts of people are going to be using AI responsibly for research purposes only?
If they come to the wrong conclusion at worst they go to the hospital and someone there tells they are wrong and not to worry. We haven’t ban googling your symptoms.
Limiting the medical misinformation.
FTFY.
AI is a tool that can provide good and bad results. To people who can’t get access to medical care easily (half of the people on the planet) it can be an useful tool to get basic medical knowledge
The issue is that AI is extremely good at sounding right, but only okay-ish at being right.
When you get good sounding information that is wrong, it can be extremely problematic and often much worse than no info at all.
Imagine LLMs aiding people with health improvements, only to lead them into health decline (actually already happening, a lot) not to mention the LLMs that further convince people of their conspiracies.
There is a reason why health professionals go through a lot of training and are under a lot of scrutiny, you wouldn’t want just any rando who thinks he know better to be your doctor
A partially good answer is better than no information at all
Already happening where? How can AI lead you to health decline? It cannot prescribe you medicines or do surgery on you
It can also help people understanding if conspiracies are true or false, for example had you ask an LLM about this post it would have highlight to you that there’s a good chance that it is propaganda.
LLMs are NOT a reputable source of medical information. They regurgitate information from random sources, and can lead to disastrous effects when pulling from bad sources or incorrectly summarizing from a good source. At best it should exclusively provide links to sources (good or bad) and let the end user make the determination if that source can be trusted.
This isn’t limiting information at all. People can still access all the reputable sources that provide the information they are looking for. This is simply cutting out the unreliable middleman.
You can ask AI to do exactly this and according to your own logic turning it out into a good at best medical tool.