Sweeping generalizations about AI models as a class of objects seem deeply uninformative to me. Perhaps I would even go so far as to say misleading. These days

Sweeping generalizations about AI models as a class of objects seem deeply uninformative to me. Perhaps I would even go so far as to say misleading. These days any undergrad can go on GitHub and have a model that does some diagnosis and I don’t understand why we have to group that together with multi-year efforts from groups of PhD’s and MDs working together to produce products. There’s obviously way more of the first than the second and so if you analyze this group as a whole it’s easy to draw the wrong conclusion about what AI as a technique is capable of. I can’t give too many details on specific examples I’m working on at Google but an example I’m not working on would be Caption Health who have an amazing AI-based ultrasound guidance product that has great prospective evidence, and several big fans in the clinical community. There are also several success stories using AI on pathology in order to target clinical trials. Can you imagine if someone made sweeping statements about webpages as if they were a coherent group of objects that you could sample from and deduce properties? “The information on websites is typically not as accurate as those websites claim”