So rare to hear criticism about medical journals. Perhaps you could talk about the highly profitable industry behind them that collects so much valuable data as well.
The best way to improve public understanding of science and medicine is to make the primary literature open and publicly archived. This will improve the integrity of the literature too because as, Vinay said, errors can slip through peer-review and readers are important in detecting them. Many of us outside academia are qualified in science/medicine, but are often barred by paywalls. Public archiving of full-text is incredibly important as well.
Re: Amia Srinavasan on Tyler Cowen, I think this interview was clearly illustrative of the reasons people don't want to engage in debate. Sure, there was some ideological treatment, but Tyler was incredibly charitable towards her and asked a lot of softball questions and she so often couldn't answer, often explicitly saying something to the effect that she was just going to ignore his question and answer something unrelated that she made up. Tyler is a great interviewer, and I haven't heard any of his guests sound worse than she did
So clearly, she would have been better off never engaging and sticking to whatever setting she's used to, at least from a narrow, self-interested perspective on her part.
I will continue to beg for autotranscribed transcripts of these I-am-sure-worthwhile sessions to be posted with the podcast. We visual learners or hard of hearing folks or folks without yet another hour to listen will be forever grateful.
No need to comment every time. We are posting transcripts on the site, thought sometimes a few days later (I just posted it for this week). At this point, they are limited to paid subscribers.
Adam, Thanks. I am a paid subscriber so it's all good with me. You might want to add a note to the podcasts that says "A transcript will follow shortly for paid subscribers". A number of other stacks to it this way. Some post the written form for all and then just the podcast for paid subscribers. But letting everyone know it is coming when you post is likely a good idea. And many thanks once again. (In full disclosure, I still prefer those where they are posted simultaneously...then everyone is at the same understanding place. But just a nit.)
When Schwab and Betterment were introduced to the investment community financial advisors were afraid that Robo-Investing would take over. However, when the market takes a huge downturn, it has been found that the algorithms trigger sell offs, when managed money would not sell. Investors are not helped by the Robots in these situations. Hopefully, this will be the same with AI in the medical field. Everyone in different, so normal protocols do not always work. A doctor would know this, but would AI?
So rare to hear criticism about medical journals. Perhaps you could talk about the highly profitable industry behind them that collects so much valuable data as well.
The best way to improve public understanding of science and medicine is to make the primary literature open and publicly archived. This will improve the integrity of the literature too because as, Vinay said, errors can slip through peer-review and readers are important in detecting them. Many of us outside academia are qualified in science/medicine, but are often barred by paywalls. Public archiving of full-text is incredibly important as well.
Well, that escalated quickly : (Chat CPT investigated by Canada's privacy commissioner) https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/opc-news/news-and-announcements/2023/an_230404/
Re: Amia Srinavasan on Tyler Cowen, I think this interview was clearly illustrative of the reasons people don't want to engage in debate. Sure, there was some ideological treatment, but Tyler was incredibly charitable towards her and asked a lot of softball questions and she so often couldn't answer, often explicitly saying something to the effect that she was just going to ignore his question and answer something unrelated that she made up. Tyler is a great interviewer, and I haven't heard any of his guests sound worse than she did
So clearly, she would have been better off never engaging and sticking to whatever setting she's used to, at least from a narrow, self-interested perspective on her part.
I will continue to beg for autotranscribed transcripts of these I-am-sure-worthwhile sessions to be posted with the podcast. We visual learners or hard of hearing folks or folks without yet another hour to listen will be forever grateful.
No need to comment every time. We are posting transcripts on the site, thought sometimes a few days later (I just posted it for this week). At this point, they are limited to paid subscribers.
Adam, Thanks. I am a paid subscriber so it's all good with me. You might want to add a note to the podcasts that says "A transcript will follow shortly for paid subscribers". A number of other stacks to it this way. Some post the written form for all and then just the podcast for paid subscribers. But letting everyone know it is coming when you post is likely a good idea. And many thanks once again. (In full disclosure, I still prefer those where they are posted simultaneously...then everyone is at the same understanding place. But just a nit.)
When Schwab and Betterment were introduced to the investment community financial advisors were afraid that Robo-Investing would take over. However, when the market takes a huge downturn, it has been found that the algorithms trigger sell offs, when managed money would not sell. Investors are not helped by the Robots in these situations. Hopefully, this will be the same with AI in the medical field. Everyone in different, so normal protocols do not always work. A doctor would know this, but would AI?