this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2026
284 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
87447 readers
3717 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I've used AI for medical transcription before and it is absolutely incredible. It's not just a word for word text, but a detailed clinical breakdown of everything discussed.
All you have to do is simply read the damn thing thoroughly and correct whatever minor errors pop up.
Takes 95% less time.
Don't forget where you are. They kill people around here for that kind of talk.
All you have to do is fire the human who is trained and rarely makes a mistake and replace them with a paid machine that almost always makes a mistake and double check everything yourself (or hire another human to double check it) because someone’s life literally depends on the entirety of the text being absolutely correct.
AI does work at a level that makes unpaid interns look like career professionals. All for the low cost of completely fucking the environment.
Glad you like it.
I'm unsure if there's an ethical issue with putting patients medical records in the data machine.
There exists online and offline ML.
Transcription is not a task that needs a full blown LLM, summarization probably does, and if being done offline or on a server with trusted verifiable lack of logging should be fine. That does not mean send it to ChatGPT API.
I would hope they store the raw conversation file encrypted with patient records so they can retranscribe later as tools improve.
It needs to be a system and a contractual framework that complies with the medical privacy regulations of the place where it's being used (in the US, HIPAA). I have some doubts about whether specific companies or people will actually comply, or the enforcement of those laws by certain governmental authorities, but I don't think it's conceptually impossible to have this kind of tech be compliant with those types of regulations.
Medical AI has guardrails out the wazoo. By the time it’s made available to a physician, it’s probably been reviewed by a council, vetted by IT, and negotiated heavily by Legal. If the data leaves the premises, it’ll be thoroughly protected and isolated.
That said, fuck AI. I’d give up medical transcription to get the environment, economy, and sanity back. Musk’s data center is running dozens of natural gas turbines in a low-income, primarily Black neighborhood 11 miles down the road from St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. It’s positively ghoulish.
Horseshit. Medical AI is using Oracle services. Larry mother fucking Elison is storing and processing this data.
The medical industry seems so ignorant about this. They think the argument is just about AI. It’s also about the fact that I don’t trust the people you’re partnered with.
I get so pissed when the AI consent is baked into other paperwork with no opt out. I will leave.
Edit: https://www.oracle.com/customers/beacon-health/
Edit: they might not all be, but I’m not authorizing your arbitrary “AI use” clause. You might as well be, now or at some point down the road.
One Rich Asshole Called Larry Elison
The agreement is only as good as the hospital’s vetting, so I may be a little optimistic after seeing a very thorough and protracted process on my side. If you work for a healthcare system that’s okay with Beacon and Oracle, then it may be time to evaluate whether they’re a good healthcare system to work for.
Clue: Medical transcription has been done by "AI" for the past 20 years. Source: sister in law was a medical transcriptionist making $80K per year, until Dragon Naturally Speaking and friends decimated her job market.
Exactly. It is a tool for professionals to use to speed up existing processes. It is not a replacement for people, regardless of what the marketers tell you so you buy their product. I don't understand how there aren't thousands of lawsuits against these AI companies for their blatantly false advertising.
AI keeps proving this day by day when people try to make it a replacement and have it blow up in their faces every day.
SEC is neutered, what makes you think anyone in charge of advertising rules hasn't been replaced by a 17 year old called Goebbels Gobbler or something with a DOGE laptop.
This article is about an incident in Australia. The SEC has no bearing on what Australia can do.
The AI bubble is an American phenomenon and their SEC isn't slowing down the insanity. Their lack of a functional SEC is everyones problem.
Hell, I just found out a few months ago my father’s office (he’s a lawyer) still did transcriptions of court proceedings manually! Full blown lawyers wasting expensive man hours doing that. As soon as I found out I got some random whisper cpp frontend and slapped it on a random computer
As long as they still have someone verifying and correcting mistakes, that's a decent solution. It doesn't need to be complicated. Whisper is by no means perfect, but from my experience it handles 90% fine, only having to listen and correct 10% is a huge improvement over transcribing everything manually.
The issues with so much of the current AI use is implementations that completely remove trained human oversight from the equation because the AI companies position it as a complete replacement for employees.
I'm curious how this is supposed to work? How do you only listen to 10%? How are you supposed to know which 10% to listen to? Wouldn't you still need to listen to it all to find that 10%?
Yes, but listening to it all once and correcting the mistakes as you hear/see them would be faster than transcribing the entire thing, then proof reading.
I hope his clients are aware