Robocars - Autonomous Drive, Self-driving, Driver-less cars

I would like to say yes but I never did get past the first tape when it came time for editing.

.....social services, health care , education and other public goods... . Though Google doesnt really get the idea of public goods

Actually....quite the opposite. Social care robots are being tested with high rates of success. No sleep, 24hr care, social (sort of) interaction. etc.
Let's be realistic, with a rapidly ageing population, we're going to need it.

Health services will be the next huge thing to benefit from technology and automation. Instant diagnosis by roboGP from data collected/cross referenced by whatever high tech device you'll be carrying soon before you've even set foot in the building, probably before you've even noticed something is wrong with you. Access to data almost instantly, which includes the latest research methods. The human touch of it will remain, it will simply require less people on the beat.

Education you can take a guess, but I reckon a lot of it will still fall on humans.

Ever worked an 8 hour shift on a production line?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqSDWoAhvLU

Cute, cool, loveable, empowering… Google are making the world a better place.

Yes, heard that all before...though those ideas show a fundamental misunderstanding of the complex nature of health care , diagnosis, illness and treatment.

Yes, heard that all before...though those ideas show a fundamental misunderstanding of the complex nature of health care , diagnosis, illness and treatment.

By being faster, more efficient, more accurate and more effective at saving and improving lives?

Yes, heard that all before...though those ideas show a fundamental misunderstanding of the complex nature of health care , diagnosis, illness and treatment.

Some health care is not complex at all and automation is used to enhance bits of it. They're not swapping out the entire NHS with Terminators.

Though it'd be kinda awesome if they did

Yes, heard that all before...though those ideas show a fundamental misunderstanding of the complex nature of health care , diagnosis, illness and treatment.

They all do... in their early days.

Because version 1 through 100 are simplistic, and unable to deal with the myriad complex scenarios that arise.

But the thing is, these automated techniques learn and iterate much faster than people do, people are too habitual. And like those self-driving cars, they will be better than people at the majority (not all) of tasks.

But you don't have to be convinced, you just have to wait and see. Right now you sound a bit luddite, but just wait and see.

The biotech and health arena has barely started to be impacted by this stuff. But it will happen. And by the time you see it hit mass market it will be handling situations more complex than most humans.

Examples that spring to mind that I know of already:

• Growing muscles in labs.
  
• Printing bespoke prosthetics at home.
  
• Exoskeletons.
  
• Robotic donkeys and assistance devices
  
• Mini drones offering spatial vision
  
• Improved IVF
  
• Remote robotic surgery
  
• Home blood tests
  
• Mental health assistants
  
• Improved detection of cancers and dermatological conditions
  
  

This is barely starting, and the whole field will change once the FDA in the US make it easier and cheaper for people to conduct trials and tests.

Making things easier and cheaper isn't what trad business and politics is about. While all this will happen, has to (like the music stuff did). There will be lots of currently powerful infliuences that will ensure this is a long drawnout revolution.

Examples that spring to mind that I know of already:

• Exoskeletons.
  
• Mini drones offering spatial vision
  
  

Totally can't wait for these two. Ian Banks fueled too much of these concepts. rip

Making things easier and cheaper isn't what trad business and politics is about. While all this will happen, has to (like the music stuff did). There will be lots of currently powerful infliuences that will ensure this is a long drawnout revolution.

It's working out pretty well for the music industry isn't it....

All of the above are pretty wonderful and are to be welcomed.

Part of my job is to deal with the performance of Drs. I see the mistakes made.

From my perspective diagnosis , treatment , planning treatment and making decisions about treatment are not that easily reduced to software alone.

Watson is awesome

At diagnosing, they'll be better. A never ending capacity to learn and analyse is a constant. Imagine a doctor that will never tire, never make mistakes, never forgets and is always focused on you.
It's a bit of an understatement to call it 'software' really.

That's exactly the kind of thing meatware would say.

Totally can't wait for these two. Ian Banks fueled too much of these concepts. rip

Can't find the swarm of mini-drones for visibility startup right now, but an exoskeleton startup is over here: http://www.eksobionics.com/

SMIDSY - sorry mate, I didn't sense you.

Auto-Repped! ^
(Velocio have we got the function to auto-detect when a post is worth repping?)

Impressive as a diagnostic tool for cancer and probably not too suprising; but still a bit naive.

However, the point I was making, rather badly on reflection, was about the complexity of health care decision making and the choices a patient and their Doctor have to make once a diagnosis is made.

That's usually politics.

I love reading cancer cases and the differences between what a doctor chooses to do when they are the patient.

In essence: A doctor will nearly always opt for a qualitative outcome and choose a very short life lived in quality with virtually no treatment. A patient will nearly always opt for a quantitative outcome based on longevity of life at a much reduced living standard.

Ultimately the conversations between a doctor and a cancer patient are founded on lies to make a patient feel better.

I found 50/13 on here to be very noble and wise in his short struggle, I really respected him for having the foresight to see through the fear at the reality and deal with things.

Technology isn't really going to help solve the messy psychological stuff people introduce. But then I, and no-one else, ever said it would.

Ultimately the conversations between a doctor and a cancer patient are founded on lies to make a patient feel better.
Perhaps there's a more nuanced explanation - Communication between doctor and patient goes through expression, filtering and interpretation.

Add to that the psychological stresses of potentially fatal disease, with all of the denial, bargaining, and so on, and the path that the patient chooses, while rational, may not follow the rational path of a third party, or in the example of the doctor with the cancer, a first party.

So not lies, as such - just a different reading of the truth.

No, they lie: http://nymag.com/news/features/cancer-peter-bach-2014-5/

http://road.cc/content/news/119890-shimano-introduce-synchro-shift-video Autoshifting - the AutoBike cometh

No, they lie: http://nymag.com/news/features/cancer-peter-bach-2014-5/

Wow that's really upsetting

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117943/googles-self-driving-cars-miss-problem-mobility-america