top | item 44688475

(no title)

austinkhale | 7 months ago

If Waymo has taught me anything, it’s that people will eventually accept robotic surgeons. It won’t happen overnight but once the data shows overwhelming superiority, it’ll be adopted.

discuss

order

cpard|7 months ago

I think Waymo is a little bit different and driving in general. Because you have an activity that most people don’t trust how other people perform it already. It’s easier to accept the robo driver.

For the medical world, I’d look to the Invisalign example as a more realistic path on how automation will become part of it.

The human will still be there the scale of operations per doctor will go up and prices will go down.

qgin|7 months ago

LASIK is essentially an automated surgery and 1-2 million people get it done every year. Nobody even seems to care that it’s an almost entirely automated process.

herval|7 months ago

My perception (and personal experience) is medical malpractice is so common, I’d gladly pick a Waymo-level robot doctor over a human one. Probably skewed since I’m a “techie”, but then again that’s why Waymo started at the techie epicenter, then will slowly become accepted everywhere

neom|7 months ago

Uhmmm... I'm sorry but when Waymo started near everyone I talked to about it says "zero % I'm going in one of those things, they won't be allowed anyway, they'll never be better than a human, I wouldn't trust one, nope, no way" and now people can't wait to try them. I understand what you're saying about the trusted side of the house (surgeons are generally high trust) - but I do think OP is right, once the data is in, people will want robot surgery.

copperx|7 months ago

Yeah, if there's overwhelming superiority, why not?

But a lot of surgeries are special corner cases. How do you train for those?

Tadpole9181|7 months ago

By collecting data where you can and further generalizing models so they can perform surgeries that it wasn't specifically trained on.

Until then, the overseeing physician identifies when an edge case is happening and steps in for a manual surgery.

This isn't a mandate that every surgery must be done with an AI-powered robot, but that they are becoming more effective and cheaper than real doctors at the surgeries they can perform. So, naturally, they will become more frequently used.

myhf|7 months ago

I don't care whether human surgeons or robotic surgeons are better at what they do. I just want more money to go to whoever owns the equipment, and less to go to people in my community.

It's called capitalism, sweaty

rahimnathwani|7 months ago

Who do you think has seen more corner cases?

A) All the DaVinci robots that have ever been used for a particular type of surgery.

B) The most experienced surgeon of that specialty.

throwup238|7 months ago

We’re already most of the way there. There’s the da Vinci Surgical System which has been around since the early 2000s, the Mako robot in orthopedics, ROSA for neurosurgery, and Mazor X in spinal surgery. They’re not yet “AI controlled” and require a lot of input from the surgical staff but they’ve been critical to enabling surgeries that are too precise for human hands.

andsoitis|7 months ago

> We’re already most of the way there. They’re not yet “AI controlled” and require a lot of input from the surgical staff but they’ve been critical to enabling surgeries that are too precise for human hands.

That does not sound like “most of the way there”. At most maybe 20%?

constantcrying|7 months ago

>If Waymo has taught me anything, it’s that people will eventually accept robotic surgeons.

I do no think that example is applicable at all. What I think people will be very tolerant of is robot assisted surgeries, which are happening right now and which will become better and more autonomous over time. What will have an extremely hard acceptance rate are robots performing unsupervised surgeries.

The future of surgery this research is suggesting is a robot devising a plan, which gets reviewed and modified by a surgeon, then the robot under the supervision of the surgeon starts implementing that plan. If complications arise beyond the robots ability to handle, the surgeon will intervene.

suninject|7 months ago

Taking taxi is a 1000-times-per-year with low risk. Having a surgery is 1 per year with very high risk. Very different mental model here.

fnordpiglet|7 months ago

That calculus has a high dependency on skill of the driver. In the situation of an unskilled driver or surgeon you would worry either way.

The frequencies are also highly dependent on the subject. Some people never ride in a taxi but once a year. Some people require many surgeries a year. The frequency of the use is irrelevant.

The frequency of the procedure is the key and it’s based on the entity doing the procedure not the recipient. Waymo in effect has a single entity learning from all the drives it does. Likewise a reinforcement trained AI surgeon would learn from all the surgeries it’s trained with.

I think what you’re after here though is the consequence of any single mistake in the two procedures. Driving is actually fairly resilient. Waymo cars probably make lots of subtle errors. There are catastrophic errors of course but those can be classified and recovered from. If you’ve ridden in a Waymo you’ll notice it sometimes makes slightly jerky movements and hesitates and does things again etc. These are all errors and attempted recoveries.

In surgery small errors also happen (this is why you feel so much pain even from small procedures) but humans aren’t that resilient to the mistakes of errors and it’s hard to recover once one has been made. The consequences are high, margins of error are low, and the domain of actions and events really really high. Driving has a few possible actions all related to velocity in two dimensions. Surgery operates in three dimensions with a variety of actions and a complex space of events and eventualities. Even human anatomy is highly variable.

But I would also expect a robotic AI surgeon to undergo extreme QA beyond an autonomous vehicle. The regulatory barriers are extremely high. If one were made available commercially, I would absolutely trust it because I know it has been proven to out perform a surgeon alone. I would also expect it’s being supervised at all times by a skilled surgeon until the error rates are better than a supervised machine (note that human supervision can add its own errors).

rscho|7 months ago

Overwhelming superiority is not for tomorrow, though. But yeah, one day for sure.

ikari_pl|7 months ago

waymo only needs to operate in a 2D space and care about what's in front and on the sides of it.

that's much simpler than three dimensional coordination.

an "oops" in a car is not immediately life threatening either

ben_w|7 months ago

> an "oops" in a car is not immediately life threatening either

They definitely can be. One of the viral videos of a Tesla "oops" in just the last few months showed it going from "fine" to "upside-down in a field" in about 5 seconds.

And I had trouble finding that because of all the other news stories about Teslas crashing.

While I trust Waymo more than Tesla, the problem space is one with rapid fatalities.

constantcrying|7 months ago

>an "oops" in a car is not immediately life threatening either

There are enough "oops"'s that are life threatening though.

mnky9800n|7 months ago

TBH i trust the robot more than some random uber driver who just can't stop talking about their fringe beliefs.

kingkawn|7 months ago

There’s been superiority with computer vision over radiologists for >10 years and still we wait