this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2025
321 points (94.0% liked)

Technology

72686 readers
2087 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A robot trained on videos of surgeries performed a lengthy phase of a gallbladder removal without human help. The robot operated for the first time on a lifelike patient, and during the operation, responded to and learned from voice commands from the team—like a novice surgeon working with a mentor.

The robot performed unflappably across trials and with the expertise of a skilled human surgeon, even during unexpected scenarios typical in real life medical emergencies.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

See the part that I dont like is that this is a learning algorithm trained on videos of surgeries.

That's such a fucking stupid idea. Thats literally so much worse than letting surgeons use robot arms to do surgeries as your primary source of data and making fine tuned adjustments based on visual data in addition to other electromagnetic readings

[–] Zacryon@feddit.org 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

That's such a fucking stupid idea.

Care to elaborate why?

From my point of view I don't see a problem with that. Or let's say: the potential risks highly depend on the specific setup.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Being trained on videos means it has no ability to adapt, improvise, or use knowledge during the surgery.

Edit: However, in the context of this particular robot, it does seem that additional input was given and other training was added in order for it to expand beyond what it was taught through the videos. As the study noted, the surgeries were performed with 100% accuracy. So in this case, I personally don't have any problems.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 5 points 5 hours ago

Yeah but the training set of videos is probably infinitely larger, and the thing about AI is that if the training set is too small they don't really work at all. Once you get above a certain data set size they start to become competent.

After all I assume the people doing this research have already considered that. I doubt they're reading your comment right now and slapping their foreheads and going damn this random guy on the internet is right, he's so much more intelligent than us scientists.

[–] cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 13 points 19 hours ago (4 children)

you could not pay me enough to have my surgery done by a robot

[–] Zacryon@feddit.org 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I trust a good machine much more than any human.

[–] qaz@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

Have you considered that the machine is made by a collection of humans?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

They obviously don't feel comfortable with the robot doing surgery on humans just yet either which is why they're not actually suggesting doing that yet. It will have to go through years and years of certification before that's even considered.

I'm sure most surgeries will still be conducted by humans but there are situations where one of these would be extremely helpful. Any situation where a surgeon isn't currently accessible and can't quickly get there. Remote communities, Disaster relief, Arctic research facilities, Starships trapped in the Delta quadrant, War zones, Ships at sea.

[–] Bluewing@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Do you think a 5 bed hospital will have the money to afford a robotic surgeon?

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 13 hours ago

yeah, it's much better to have a towel left inside of you by a real human.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

If it were the only option, I'd gladly take it.

I rely on robots to do a lot of other things in my life, directly and indirectly.

Well, not many directly. But machines, definitely.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 5 hours ago

Yeah it's not like I refuse to drive my car because it wasn't handcrafted by a human.

It is an electrical fault on four wheels, but that's just because it's old.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 33 points 1 day ago (3 children)

So... Judging by recent trends in AI, this will be used to devalue the labor of surgeons and be provided as the only option available to people who are not rich. People will die from what would get a human charged with neglegent homicide but, it will be covered up and, when it comes to light just how dangerous it is, nothing will happen because all of the regulatory agencies have been dismantled.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 4 points 5 hours ago

Outside of the US there are pretty stringent rules about what can and cannot be used in the medical profession. Typically it will take at least a decade for a drug to be approved, which is actually a problem in and of itself, but you're not concerned about that, you're concerned about technology being used before it's ready.

As for "devaluing the work of surgeons", surgeons are overworked as it is, there is nowhere near enough of them. If they don't have to do simple procedures then they are available to do the more complex surgeries that actually require skill. They'll be fine. Wealth isn't really a factor in countries where healthcare isn't profit motivated.

[–] percent@infosec.pub 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

OR maybe everyone — including the poor — will eventually have access to robotic surgeons with the equivalent of like 500 human years of experience, but with the latest surgical best practices that have only existed in recent years. The experience gained by a single surgery could be shared across all of them.

We're talking about surgery. If some technology can provide significantly more valuable labor than its human counterpart (which, in this case, could mean more lives saved), then it might actually be worth exploring.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 7 hours ago

That would be wonderful. The current way that the world has been "working" for a good while now makes me think it unlikely, unfortunately. The vast majority of technological innovation in the last half-century has been used to extract wealth and replace options available to the non-ultra-wealthy with inferior substitutes that are cheaper to make, often for the same effective cost.

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I would rather get surgery done by a robot than not get it done at all. I'm not gonna be picky about "devaluing surgeons" if my life is on the line, but if that's the hill you wanna die on then good on ya, mate.

[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 7 hours ago

Who's dying on what hill now?

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Not fair. A robot can watch videos and perform surgery but when I do it I'm called a "monster" and "quack".

But seriously, this robot surgeon still needs a surgeon to chaperone so what's being gained or saved? It's just surgery with extra steps. This has the same execution as RoboTaxis (which also have a human onboard for emergencies) and those things are rightly being called a nightmare. What separates this from that?

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Human flaw. A surgeon doesnt require steady hands. So if they were in any way damaged they could still continue being a surgeon.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago

It can't sneeze

[–] nulluser@lemmy.world 54 points 1 day ago (3 children)

without human help

...

responded to and learned from voice commands from the team

🤨🤔

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

You underestimate the demands on a surgeon’s body to perform surgery. This makes it much less prone to tiredness, mistakes, or even if the surgeon is physically incapable in any way of continuing life saving surgery

[–] nulluser@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

That's absolutely not the point. I was criticizing the journalism, not technology. 🙄

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 day ago

They should have specified "without physical human help."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 94 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Good, now add jailtime for the ceo if something goes wrong, then we'll have a very safe tech.

[–] qfe0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 12 hours ago

Just like how we jail every surgeon that does something wrong

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] DrunkenPirate@feddit.org 111 points 2 days ago (10 children)

And then you‘re lying on the table. Unfortunately, your case is a little different than the standard surgery. Good luck.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 5 hours ago

I assume my insides are pretty much like everyone else's. I feel like if there was that much of a complication it would have been pretty obvious before the procedure started.

"Hey this guy had two heads, I'm sure the AI will work it out."

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 52 points 2 days ago (10 children)

At some point in a not very distant future, you will probably be better off with the robot/AI. As it will have wider knowledge of how to handle fringe cases than a human surgeon.
We are not there yet, but maybe in 10 years or maybe 20?

[–] balder1991@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago

Or the most common cases can be automated while the more nuanced surgeries will take the actual doctors.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 34 points 2 days ago (7 children)

I'd bet on at least twenty years before it's in general use, since this is a radical change and it makes sense to be cautious about new technology in medicine. Initial clinical trials for some common, simple surgeries within ten years, though.

This is one of those cases where an algorithm carefully trained on only relevant data can have value. It isn't the same as feeding an LLM the unfiltered Internet and then expecting it to learn only from the non-crazy parts.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 5 hours ago

The idea that a carefully curated data set may yield better results seems to be something that even the likes of Google engineers can't get their heads around.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] imTIREDnhungryboss@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

so this helps with costs right? right? 🥺🤔🤨

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

AI and robotics are coming for the highest paid jobs first. The attack on education is much more sinister than you think. We are approaching an era where many thinking and high cost labor fields will be eliminated. This attack on education is because the plan is to replace it all with AI.

It is pretty sickening really to think of a world where your AI teacher supplied by Zombie Twitter will teach history lessons to young pupils about whether or not the Holocaust is real. I am not making this shit up.

This is no longer about wars against nations. This has become the war for the human mind and billionaires just found the cheat code.

[–] lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It helps the capitalists' profit margins 😊😊😊

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This was a new word for me, so I had to look it up: It's an... interesting choice of words to describe the success of a robot.
Of course a robot would perform the job unflappably, it is emotionless by design. I'm pretty sure it would go right ahead and murder the patient unflappably as well. The robot "keeping its cool" is not even a question.

That said, this does sound very impressive, even if I think there's some pretty crazy risks involved. Hopefully they have more respect for the problem then self-driving car companies.

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I want that thing where a light "paints" over wounds and they heal.

load more comments (1 replies)

Oh good it’s voice controlled. Because that technology works amazingly all the time.

load more comments
view more: next ›