▲ 75 ▼ AI-designed universal vaccine clears first human trial, targets future coronavirus threats with needle-free delivery. (medicalxpress.com) submitted 4 months ago by Lugh@futurology.today [M] to c/futurology@futurology.today 31 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago (2 children) unfortunately, this how most companies are run permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Gladaed@feddit.org 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) I am sorry, but did you read that I was talking about medicine first and foremost? Also using evidence based approaches can be beneficial for longevity of any company and if you truly believe otherwise, then that's your perogative. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago That's true for all research in medicine. Yes, that’s why I pointed out why it works in this field. The suggestion to not check for errors is mental and would only be suggested by non technical people. The way people run companies in others fields is mental, and they want to use AI without verification. They shouldn’t, but they do (hence the “unfortunately”). And even when they say they’re evidence based, it’s usually cherry picked to justify what they were going to do anyway. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 1 point 4 months ago (1 child) I am sorry, but did you read that I was talking about medicine first and foremost? Also using evidence based approaches can be beneficial for longevity of any company and if you truly believe otherwise, then that's your perogative. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago That's true for all research in medicine. Yes, that’s why I pointed out why it works in this field. The suggestion to not check for errors is mental and would only be suggested by non technical people. The way people run companies in others fields is mental, and they want to use AI without verification. They shouldn’t, but they do (hence the “unfortunately”). And even when they say they’re evidence based, it’s usually cherry picked to justify what they were going to do anyway. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zachariah@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago That's true for all research in medicine. Yes, that’s why I pointed out why it works in this field. The suggestion to not check for errors is mental and would only be suggested by non technical people. The way people run companies in others fields is mental, and they want to use AI without verification. They shouldn’t, but they do (hence the “unfortunately”). And even when they say they’re evidence based, it’s usually cherry picked to justify what they were going to do anyway. permalink fedilink source parent