Property is a local low - it applies to a thing that exists in one place. Intellectual property is trying to apply similar rules to stuff that happen remotely - a text is not a thing, and controlling copying might work in some technological regimes while in others would require totalitarian control. When you extend these rules to cover not just copying of texts but also at the level of ideas it gets even worse.

There is something not right with expecting that artificial intelligence will have the same characteristics as human intelligence. (I am answering to the quote)

I think he's commenting more on the inconsistency of it, rather than the level of intelligence per se.

this. I keep repeating to people to stick to very specific questions with very specific limits and expectations but no... give me 20 pages of phd level text that finds cure for cancer

That’s why we need progressive hardening: https://github.com/zby/llm-do/blob/main/docs/concept_spec.md

The American labs are paranoid. The secrecy kills innovation. Open Source means ideas can meet and have sex and produce offsprings.

Destroying high trust society is a lot of fun.

OK, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to Hacker News.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

A concise 9 word summary of OTR. As a young person, I found the idea of just running around with your friends, doing whatever, and not trying to be "productive" in any way, intoxicating.

After I got a little older, though, I identified more with people left in the wake of destruction (e.g., the guy who owned the new car they were driving across the country for delivery.)

TLDR: ai changes the economic calculus of software development. It makes automated testing more beneficial in comparison to costs.

I think he is right.

They should just give the user some control over this

Just to be precise. The sepsis alarm was not blocking x-ray or antibiotics but rather suggesting them.

“”” Agyare had instructed Banerjee to hydrate Sam right away but to wait for the results of Sam’s lab work before ordering a chest X-ray or the strong antibiotics used to treat sepsis. “””

Most sepsis alert implementations ironically do block review of the data to see if the sepsis is real, what triggered the alert, and what treatments are appropriate. Part of the sepsis recommendations always proposed by the EMR is to give lots and lots of IV fluids, even if the patient is in decompensated heart failure which would make it worse

but then "He couldn’t figure out how to navigate the template to make some but not all of the auto-populated orders."

The question should be why was he trying to disregard the orders that were part of the standard protocol for a possible sepsis situation - just accept them all as intended.

The system was poorly designed; as pointed out elsewhere: ordering antibiotics before lab results come back is a bad practice. However, the particular sepsis popup required antibiotics to be ordered, and lab results hadn't come back yet, but another procedure (x-ray) needed to be ordered immediately.

People dramatically underestimate how much sepsis protocols and antibiotic stewardship are in tension.

The problem is that people gravitate towards more impersonal relationships themselves because it frees them from the complexity of social calculations. We escape small organisations, we try to be independent from each other and prefer to depend on impersonal institutions.

I think our minds don’t use novelty - but salience and it also might be easier to implement.