> it should be made illegal for a doctor to make a diagnosis without consulting an LLM
> All liability stays at the doctor who makes the final diagnosis
Sorry, what? You’d force clinicians to use a specific technology (a specific “how” for finding their answer) and also make them liable for the correctness of that answer?
You seem to have a strange idea about the law if in the same breath as you make something illegal, you sigh with exasperation at lawyers and liability.
I feel like this is unfair, because Epic Systems could recommend ICD10 codes based on the listed symptoms. The doctor would pick the final diagnosis code from the recommended list or their own. That doesn't mean Epic shoulders the liability.
What if the case is so straightforward (you've see thousands of these, hundreds a year, the entire system is built around them) that you know the diagnosis in less than the blink of an eye?
What if it's emergent, and you have no time to think, like a major hemorrhage? Not only is it obvious, but you must act now, right now?
What if there is a highly studied, routinized process (e.g. cardiac arrest) where you're managing a team going through the diagnostic procedure and treatment, which, over decades, have become a carefully interleaved dance performed at stacatto pace, and, again, there is no time to consult an LLM?
We should require software engineers to do the same. So much garbage code I've reviewed that would have easily been resolved had the SE just "asked an LLM".
Maybe we can legislate this into existence as well?
> All liability stays at the doctor who makes the final diagnosis
Sorry, what? You’d force clinicians to use a specific technology (a specific “how” for finding their answer) and also make them liable for the correctness of that answer?
You seem to have a strange idea about the law if in the same breath as you make something illegal, you sigh with exasperation at lawyers and liability.