285
Microsoft CEO warns that we must 'do something useful' with AI or they'll lose 'social permission' to burn electricity on it (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In a conversation at this year's rich person convention—aka the World Economic Forum—Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella warned that AI will lose public support unless it's used to "do something useful that changes the outcomes of people and communities and countries and industries."

He did at least provide one real example of what he means by all this: "When a doctor can … spend more time with the patient, because the AI is doing the transcription and entering the records in the EMR system, entering the right billing code so that the healthcare industry is better served across the payer, the provider, and the patient, ultimately—that's an outcome that I think all of us can benefit from."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -2 points 9 months ago* (5 children)

Codes need to be complicated. Insurance is taking advantage of that (and adding more complexity), but the complexity is in the system in ways that cannot be removed. The common cholesterol test is a lot cheaper to run than a vitamin D test (20 years ago I found online the price list from a lab, IIRC costs ranged from $0.80 to $15,000 - I can't find anything current and my memory might be off a bit, but close enough for discussion), so there needs to be a different code for each test just to ensure the right bill is made. Insurance just uses those codes to decide which they will pay for.

I do not want my insurance to pay for homeopathy or other scams. That just raises my rates and ensures a worse outcome for everyone. So the system of different codes for everything is overall good. There are a lot of debate on how much money we should spend on someone who will die "soon", some would call giving them a quick poison the most humane thing to do - there is plenty of room to disagree on what should or should not be allowed and insurance is just taking a position that not everyone agrees with.

The real problem in my opinion is nobody has a choice about what insurance they have, and so we are all yelling we want something "better" without needing to care about the trade offs.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    I understand different things need different codes, otherwise the labs or other doctors don't know what they need to do, but the fact a doctor can order a test and then a random person with no medical background, or even just a machine, can tell the doctor "no, that's not needed" is a waste in the system and a waste of people's, often sick people's, time. There is no code for homeopathy tests or procedures, so there's no way for them to be prescribed. A doctor can't order 10 ccs of water danced on by fairies, so I don't see that being an issue. My point is that whatever a doctor orders shouldn't need that much oversight. If at the end of the year the government wants to run a "how many MRIs per patient" check on providers they can still do so, but that doesn't require every MRI to be justified in the moment. Then you can investigate the practice for potential fraud if they're not actually doing the MRIs and just charging for them, or if they're being ordered unnecessarily. Doctors should be trusted to do right by their patients. If the government had a going rate for procedures and there was one place where people can see everything that was billed as part of their care things might not need as much oversight.

    I admittedly don't work in the field, and I'm aware Medicare/medicaid fraud does happen, but considering the waste (on all sides including patients) created by all the overhead I think we'd come out ahead by just trusting doctors and checking end of year stats.

    Also, through the ACA people do technically get quite a lot of choice in their healthcare benefits. I don't think it's a good system because in my opinion your income shouldn't dictate your quality of care or coverage, but if you're looking for more choice in the US and have not looked at the marketplace I recommend doing so. I personally think single payer is better, but definitely look there if you're looking for HSA or deductible differences.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent