> In medicine, we're already seeing productivity gains from AI charting leading to an expectation that providers will see more patients per hour.
And not, of course, an expectation of more minutes of contact per patient, which would be the better outcome optimization for both provider and patient. Gotta pump those numbers until everyone but the execs are an assembly line worker in activity and pay.
I don't think that more minutes of contact is better for anybody.
As a patient, I want to spend as little time with a doctor as possible and still receive maximally useful treatment.
As a doctor, I would want to extract maximal comp from insurance which I don't think is tied time spent with the patient, rather to a number of different treatments given.
Also please note that in most western world medical personnel is currently massively overprovisioned and so reducing their overall workload would likely lead to better result per treatment given.
If you read through that list and dismiss it as people who were already mentally ill or more susceptible to this... that's what Dr. K (psychiatrist) assumed too until he looked at some recent studies:
https://youtu.be/MW6FMgOzklw?si=JgpqLzMeaBLGuAAE
Clickbait title, but well researched and explained.
Most people who develop AI psychosis have a period of healthy use beforehand. It becomes very dangerous when a person decreases their time with their real friends to spend more time with the chatbot, as you have no one to keep you in check with what reality is and it can create a feedback loop.
Wow, are we already in a world where we can say "Most people who develop AI psychosis..." because there are now enough of them to draw meaningful conclusions from?
I'm not criticising your comment by the way, that just feels a bit mindblowing, the world is moving very fast at the moment.
Tim Cook at Apple was like Steve Ballmer at Microsoft. They scaled the company and made stock owners happy, but weren't true visionaries. I suppose there's a need for both types of leaders.
Microsoft's stock was flat for Ballmer's entire tenure. Investors were most definitely not happy, and that was the very reason he was forced out. Tim Cook meanwhile has grown the company 10x. It's an idiotic comparison.
Somewhat unfair. Ballmer took over at the dotcom peak. They were trading at ~70x earnings on his first day as CEO. That's the only reason MSFT stock performance under his leadership was (from start day to retire day) flat. There is no CEO who would have been able to flout the dotcom bust and maintain a 70x PE ratio for 13 years. But under his tenure, he grew revenue at one of the worlds biggest companies by almost 4x, a 10% CAGR, and EPS also increased considerably.
Also, he wasn't forced out, and the reason ValuAct was pushing for a board seat at the time was because Microsoft was falling behind in mobile and tablets. Around that time, Microsoft had taken a $900m writedown related to Surface RT.
Meanwhile, Tim Cook took over in 2011 when Apple's P/E ratio was only 13 (today it's 36). He has also obviously been a skilled operator, but stock charts by themselves don't provide all context or tell the whole story.
Longhorn, Zune, phone, Skype, bungie , among many other failures. I was there, as a kid of the 80s, Microsoft, Windows, Visual Basic, VStudio were EVERYTHING up until around 2003, they just dropped too many balls.
It was botching Mobile that really did Balmer in and possibly not reacting quite quickly enough to the need for Enterprise-grade Cloud Computing while Amazon was bootstrapping AWS right in Microsoft's back yard.
They got the cloud situation under control but losing Mobile to Apple and Google was a disaster and they're paying for it still.
Nope. I'd go with anything from MIT. Racing The Beam and I Am Error were transcendental for me. Some stuff from Boss Fight books is absurdly good. Final Fantasy V immediately comes to mind.
Counter Strike has weekly drops, you get a case and some random skin. Usually those are not worth much themselves, except maybe for the case. People then sell these weekly drops on the community market and get Steam balance. Sell enough to afford a key (+case).
In other cases kids might have access to their parents payment methods, or they can buy prepaid cards from places like gas stations. I used to do this to buy games when I was younger and my parents wouldn't buy games for me.
Valve doesn't prevent anyone from opening cases. There is no KYC.
The guidance counselor does not have the training or time to "fix" the trauma you just gave this kid and his friends. Insane to put minors through this.
reply