The thing about medical is that it’s so big - no one expert can cover even a small fraction of “medical”. So, unless you have a whole team of specialists there on-hand, you just might benefit from having some “automated experts” available when you need the pattern recognition they can offer.

Except the medical expert in field A can’t be the human in the loop to verify the AI medical slopPut for field B is correct, cuz the medical expert isn’t an expert in field B. A team of human specialists will be better in the long run.

A team of human specialists will be better in the long run.

For the 0.1% of the population who can afford to assemble a team of human specialists in a timely fashion when they need them…

For the rest of us, cyborg M.D.s with brain augmentation (they called this a PubMed search in the 1990s, it’s faster and more effective today) are better than the un-augmented M.D.s we can afford.

Psychotic.

Yes, also a realistic assessment of modern life.

The thing about software is that it’s so big - no one expert can cover even a small fraction of “software”. If you’re a kernel driver developer, you might benefit from having some “automated experts” available in CSS/HTML for the pattern recognition they can offer.

I find it amusing how most experts think AI is great for every field except theirs.

Personally, I find AI/LLM agents to be very useful in software development, dramatically improving the current imperfect practice of the art to something - not perfect - but quite a bit better than was practical / possible even one year ago.

The MD I worked for spent six weeks researching problems a friend of his had before the friend died, if he could have done that same research in a day instead of six weeks, he (or any other M.D. doing the research) could have saved his friends life.