[barfbagginus]

Yeah but it's going to be easy to tell they're bullshitting. They'll always be 2 steps behind the state of the art, so they'll make straw men arguments like judging LLMs without using RAG to provide a hierarchical index of medical codes. Anyone current on AI papers will immediately spot the issues, where investors and the public will not.

This leaves a huge opportunity for open source systems which provide better diagnostics for free, but will require us to hustle. Then, the open source users among us, at least, can pioneer free and open AI augmented health care. That can become a popular option once there's strong evidence that our virtual doctors are just more competent and understanding.

I am excited about the idea that one day soon I'll have a doctor that listens to me, understands the current science and evidence about my conditions, and does not sideline me because I'm autistic, anxious, and obsessive. And we might get to help build it and make it free for everyone!