I’m going to have to disagree with your reply.

AI is capable of doing a better and more efficient job of diagnosing and recommending surgeries than humans, or even human created algorithms.

Think about Chess. When computers were in their infancy, there was much skepticism that a computer could ever master the game of chess and reliably beat the world’s best players. Eventually we made chess engines that were very strong, by feeding them tons of data and chess theory, basically giving them algorithms that helped them contend with top players. These engines performed well because they played the game at the level of top players but without the human component to make a natural human error. They could beat grand masters, but it wasn’t a sure victory.

Enter AI. New chess engines were made with AI neural networks, and rather than feeding them tons of chess data and theory, they are just given the rules of the game and set to play and learn with the goal of increasing their win rate. These AI chess engines were able to far surpass previous conventional algorithmic engines because they were self-learning and defied conventional chess theory, discovering new ways to play and win, showing humans variations and positions never considered before that could win.

In a similar way, AI could do the same with healthcare, and basically anything else. If the AI is advanced enough and given the goal of finding the best survival rate/quality of life for diagnosis and surgery, it will do so more efficiently than any human or basic algorithm because it will see patterns and possibilities that today’s best doctors and surgeons do not. It is obvious that a sufficiently advanced AI would diagnose you and recommend the correct and best surgery more accurately and more efficiently than even the worlds best possible team of professionals or any non-learning algorithm.

But the issue is the insurance companies will never instruct the AI that best survival rates/quality of life is the “checkmate”, but rather whatever outcomes lead to the highest profit with least amount of legal or litigation risk.

This unironically needs to happen next so that dumbass MAGAs can see why the presidents behavior is…problematic? No no… the phrase I’m looking for escapes me - let’s go with “batshit fucking insane” for now, and come together to put an end to executive overreach.

Which is not to say there can’t be a debate about ending oil subsidies, mind you. Just that the president shouldn’t be able to make such broad knee-jerk unilateral decisions in response to shitposts. Or even non-shitposts.

Daycare is woke. Just another obvious win for the average American and MAGA voter.

/s

I don’t think the person you are responding to has nearly enough brain cells to comprehend such an obvious follow up question.

There’s no solidarity amongst Americans. I think that’s the central issue.

The right wing fascist takeover has been in the making for decades, and a crucial part of that was capturing news outlets and turning them full bore propaganda. Control the narrative and condition 30+% of the population to believe anything the right wing regime says, and also condition them to distrust and hate anyone not on their side.

Because of this, we have little hope of unifying against the threat, even if things go bad. Troops in cities, people getting kidnapped off the streets and sent to foreign torture prisons, Epstein involvement and cover-ups, grifts, fraud, a self-enriching “president” who has made over 3 billion dollars in less than a year after re-election; all of these just by themselves would have sparked revolution in an older America, but today we are kept opposed at the class level because the brainwashing and conditioning of so many millions of Americans was successful and they will never turn on the people grifting them.

The kind of enlightened centrism that’s been prevalent in these types I see as a denial of accepting the reality that we are in the midst of a vicious right-wing fascist takeover. No doubt many are just agitators trying to influence opinions by normalizing the worst sides behavior, but I think genuine centrists are just having trouble coming to grips with how bad things really are right now and will become in the near future.

In normal times, finding the faults in all sides and trying to find middle ground is typically good. Maybe even admirable. But in this climate? Wake up.

This is an asinine position to take because AI will never, ever make these decisions in a vacuum, and it’s really important in this new age of AI that people fully understand that.

It could be the case that an accurate, informed AI would do a much better job of diagnosing patients and recommending the best surgeries. However, if there’s a profit incentive and business involved, you can be sure that AI will be mangled by the appropriate IT, lobbyist, congressional avenues to make sure if modifies its decision making in the interests of the for-profit parties.

She suffers from TDS badly.

Fronts are often run terribly. On purpose. It’s the lucrative and illegal side hustle that gets all the attention.