Europe
News and information from Europe ๐ช๐บ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
view the rest of the comments
I know there are reliable AI applications, for example cancer recognition models scanning CT imaging.
However, from what I know systems trying pattern recognition in human behaviour are the opposite of these medical implementations.
Those are not reliable at all and only meant as hints for the radiologist to check certain areas twice. They do not identify cancer but spots that may be out of place. However, not all radiologists seem to know that and a relative of mine would have been pushed into end-of-life care if not for the intervention of another doctor in the family. He had to take it up to the head of department, though. The spots in question turned out to be old scarring and could have been easily identified if the radiologist had also consulted older scans as would have been her damned job. Instead she thought the AI was thinking for her.
Similar software also exists for spotting tooth cavities. It's useful, but not to be trusted.
I give up.
Apparently you do have to caveat every little fucking case for every screwed up situation that could ever exist. OBVIOUSLY these scans have to be double checked and OBVIOUSLY "reliable" does not mean "never ever could something go wrong" and OBVIOUSLY shitty or overworked personnel makes wrong decisions.
But if you have to account for all that in every yet so minor argument you want to make you'd have to write at least a bachelor thesis level publication about the weather being warm and sunny outside my window right now.
You cannot have a basic discussion about any topic on this level so screw it, I'm out of this.
I'm fucking autistic and love to get into unnecessary depths of details but this is too much even for me AND YES I KNOW autism is a spectrum so YES OBVIOUSLY there will be some people WHO MIGHT NOT EVEN BE AUTISTIC who love it even more to discuss these details but this is just dumb and I just can't anymore.
Don't you feel that this is a bit uncalled for? All I said is that these pieces of software do not in fact identify cancer. They are not reliable because they aren't even allowed to be in the circumstances that they are supposed to be used. They are a visual aid, nothing more.
Every article and paper I found so far concludes that AI improves the ability of medical personnel to recognize and diagnose cancer.
And no, it is not uncalled for, because I had to deal with such bullshit the whole damn day (and not for the first time) and it is enough. I'm logging out for today.
I'm not saying it doesn't. I'm saying it doesn't detect cancer and is not reliable. If you know how it's supposed to work, it works. Some people who should, don't, though.
The way your last post was worded, I would very much suggest that that's a you problem.
Or the cancer recognition model might flag your X-ray as cancer just because it was taken with a particular type of X-ray machine...
Not that this would ever happen, of course. (it did)
Exactly that. The software is not meant to flag anything as cancer, though. It's meant to flag points of interest and it's the radiologist's job to check what they might be. The problem is, that there seem to be radiologists who think the AI can accurately detect cancer.
https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/26825537