Current Events > Fuck it, I'll just start a healthcare automation company

(+) Yeah! (+)

Every time CE makes a topic about socialism and healthcare, I keep mentioning that we need to be investing in technology that can automate healthcare. Machines can and will do procedures and diagnoses and routine checkups for a fraction of the costs we have now. Machines are reproducible for a fraction of the cost. Machines don't need to spend many years learning the way humans do.

In other words, medicine and surgeries and preventive care are only as expensive as they are because of the human costs in place. With technology, we can easily scale a healthcare system to any arbitrary number of humans without suffering the same kind of inefficiencies and bottlenecks we'd suffer if we tried to employ more doctors or nurses or knowledge workers.

But nope, people think the only solution is to throw more money at the problem and to just raise taxes as much as we have to in order to fund a system that will get more and more expensive the more human labor is required.

So instead of just repeating myself ad nauseum on a forum where most posters are either far left or left leaning, I'll just start a company and start proving that it's the correct course of action.

Yall will see. :l

I wasn't aware "far left or left leaning" meant "doesn't like automation"
---

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

Machines can and will do procedures and diagnoses and routine checkups for a fraction of the costs we have now.

And the owners of those machines will happily pass those savings along to us!

Hardware and software have two trends.

Trend #1 - they're getting more powerful with time
Trend #2 - they're getting much cheaper with time

There's no reason why autonomous healthcare needs to be limited to just huge janky machines from 20 years ago.

Dragon239 posted...

I wasn't aware "far left or left leaning" meant "doesn't like automation"

You won't ever find a leftist advocating for anything besides 1) spending more money and 2) taxing people more, tbqh.

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

Machines can and will do procedures and diagnoses and routine checkups for a fraction of the costs we have now.

And the owners of those machines will happily pass those savings along to us!

Hardware and software have two trends.

Trend #1 - they're getting more powerful with time
Trend #2 - they're getting much cheaper with time

There's no reason why autonomous healthcare needs to be limited to just huge janky machines from 20 years ago.

Who said anything about old janky machines?

Regardless of what type of healthcare software/hardware, they will not make the prices cheaper without government intervention. That's like saying with McDonald's adding kiosks, they will reduce the price of their food. It's not going to happen.

You're not thinking critically. The point is that cheaper and more powerful hardware and software are giving people access to much more computational power for a much lower cost. Even in their own homes.

Hardware will advance to the point where you can assemble, say, an ultrasound machine in your own house and load up an ultrasound app for whenever you need an ultrasound. You can already build an ultrasound machine with a Raspberry Pi and some other circuitry for under $200. It's not entirely safe for personal use, but we'll get there soon.

The time for more advancements is super close, and the longer we delay on investing money and brains into automating it all, the longer we spend time relying on a government to provide healthcare.

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

Hardware will advance to the point where you can assemble, say, an ultrasound machine in your own house and load up an ultrasound app for whenever you need an ultrasound. You can already build an ultrasound machine with a Raspberry Pi and some other circuitry for under $200. It's not entirely safe for personal use, but we'll get there soon.

Okay, awesome. It "will advance"

Right now that doesn't mean shit, though. People are getting overcharged like crazy and going into debt to pay medical bills. That situation needs to be addressed now

The intellectual right, everybody.

Sad!

Rome was not built in a day. And once you give the government the power to take people's earnings and provide a service, it's going to be incredibly difficult (if not impossible) for there to ever be a change or innovation in that sector. A big government has no incentive or motive to improve its service delivery or quality.

Just stop with these heretical ideas. God is great and we will leave it up to him.
---

I would first do a lot of googling on healthcare automation startups so you can see what people are already working on and stuff. A lot can be learned from what has been tried and failed, etc.
---

byron you're really impressing me with that level of shitposting, bro.

Sativa_Rose posted...

I would first do a lot of googling on healthcare automation startups so you can see what people are already working on and stuff. A lot can be learned from what has been tried and failed, etc.

Great advice! Unless there's a startup out there trying to keep quiet, I don't see anything on the first item I want to tackle.

this is possibly the Proudcladiest topic that has ever been made

The UK has had its NHS for nearly 70 years now, most of that time with far less automation than currently. Yes, automation is a good thing, but your insistence that it is the only possible solution at a time when several countries have far more effective systems than the US is baffling.
---

Did you ever start that garbage company? How that's going for you?
---

Antifar posted...

The UK has had its NHS for nearly 70 years now, most of that time with far less automation than currently. Yes, automation is a good thing, but your insistence that it is the only possible solution at a time when several countries have far more effective systems than the US is baffling.

1) The UK's population is five times smaller than our population. That matters.
2) Obesity is becoming an increasingly large challenge for the UK health system. Time will tell if it survives in its current form.

3) I'll just leave these here:

http://www.politico.eu/article/what-britains-health-care-nhs-crisis-means-for-theresa-may-jeremy-corbyn/

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/nhs-crisis-royal-college-of-physicians-putting-lives-at-risk-top-doctors-theresa-may-jeremy-hunt-a7520266.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/05/21/there-is-an-alternative-to-nhs-inefficiency-and-failure/

http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/u-s-shouldnt-copy-u-k-s-collapsing-single-payer-health-care-system/

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/nhs-uk-now-has-one-of-the-worst-healthcare-systems-in-the-developed-world-according-to-oecd-report-a6721401.html

It's literally not sustainable.

Dragon239 posted...

I wasn't aware "far left or left leaning" meant "doesn't like automation"

The left loves them since it will force people to be more reliable on the government.
---

Transcendentia posted...

Every time CE makes a topic about socialism and healthcare, I keep mentioning that we need to be investing in technology that can automate healthcare. Machines can and will do procedures and diagnoses and routine checkups for a fraction of the costs we have now. Machines are reproducible for a fraction of the cost. Machines don't need to spend many years learning the way humans do.

In other words, medicine and surgeries and preventive care are only as expensive as they are because of the human costs in place. With technology, we can easily scale a healthcare system to any arbitrary number of humans without suffering the same kind of inefficiencies and bottlenecks we'd suffer if we tried to employ more doctors or nurses or knowledge workers.

But nope, people think the only solution is to throw more money at the problem and to just raise taxes as much as we have to in order to fund a system that will get more and more expensive the more human labor is required.

So instead of just repeating myself ad nauseum on a forum where most posters are either far left or left leaning, I'll just start a company and start proving that it's the correct course of action.

Yall will see. :l

I don't see what the automation suggestion has to do with the current t discussion about healthcare. Someone can want automation and a non single payer structure and someone can want automation and a single payer type structure.

All you're saying is you want the system that's the most efficient and cheapest. Is there anyone that's actually disagreeing that automation is good?
---

Transcendentia posted...

1) The UK's population is five times smaller than our population. That matters.

nope

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

1) The UK's population is five times smaller than our population. That matters.

Why does that matter? Doesn't that just mean that we will have five times as many people paying into it?

It's not that simple.

emblem boy posted...

Transcendentia posted...

Every time CE makes a topic about socialism and healthcare, I keep mentioning that we need to be investing in technology that can automate healthcare. Machines can and will do procedures and diagnoses and routine checkups for a fraction of the costs we have now. Machines are reproducible for a fraction of the cost. Machines don't need to spend many years learning the way humans do.

In other words, medicine and surgeries and preventive care are only as expensive as they are because of the human costs in place. With technology, we can easily scale a healthcare system to any arbitrary number of humans without suffering the same kind of inefficiencies and bottlenecks we'd suffer if we tried to employ more doctors or nurses or knowledge workers.

But nope, people think the only solution is to throw more money at the problem and to just raise taxes as much as we have to in order to fund a system that will get more and more expensive the more human labor is required.

So instead of just repeating myself ad nauseum on a forum where most posters are either far left or left leaning, I'll just start a company and start proving that it's the correct course of action.

Yall will see. :l

I don't see what the automation suggestion has to do with the current t discussion about healthcare. Someone can want automation and a non single payer structure and someone can want automation and a single payer type structure.

All you're saying is you want the system that's the most efficient and cheapest. Is there anyone that's actually disagreeing that automation is good?

The people who "b-b-b-b-but my JERBS!!!" don't want automation. In fact, it's rather popular for the left (and even some on the right) to fearmonger about robots and how we'll all be unemployed.

AlternativeFAQS posted...

Transcendentia posted...

1) The UK's population is five times smaller than our population. That matters.

nope

Then let's triple the population. Surely that won't affect the food supply or telecommunications or transportation or the water supply or any other system that needs to scale for the entire population.

Let's multiply the population by 100 and see if our systems still work.

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

It's not that simple.

Why not? We already pay more than any other country per capita.

Seems like we'd save some money.

Because having more people doesn't mean that you'll have enough tax payers to cover the difference + the increased complexities of having a larger system. Not to mention that it's already problematic to think that you can rely on tax cattle to actually get this job done in a sustainable and efficient way.

Transcendentia posted...

The people who "b-b-b-b-but my JERBS!!!" don't want automation. In fact, it's rather popular for the left (and even some on the right) to fearmonger about robots and how we'll all be unemployed.

But the main subject with healthcare has nothing to do with those people. That subject has not been apart of any discussion on the healthcare system I've heard about.
---

literal_garbage posted...

Did you ever start that garbage company? How that's going for you?

@Transcendentia

I believe you were going to hire the homeless? Can we get a status update on this great venture?
---

AlternativeFAQS posted...

Transcendentia posted...

1) The UK's population is five times smaller than our population. That matters.

nope

Yes. The US is getting overpopulated at this point.

Just look at the cost of living in the coastal areas.

Norways small population + petroleum is the only reason they have all those

"Nice Things"
---

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

It's not that simple.

Why not? We already pay more than any other country per capita.

Seems like we'd save some money.

Because having more people doesn't mean that you'll have enough tax payers to cover the difference + the increased complexities of having a larger system. Not to mention that it's already problematic to think that you can rely on tax cattle to actually get this job done in a sustainable and efficient way.

We'll give it a shot anyways.

"DURRRRR"

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

byron posted...

Transcendentia posted...

It's not that simple.

Why not? We already pay more than any other country per capita.

Seems like we'd save some money.

Because having more people doesn't mean that you'll have enough tax payers to cover the difference + the increased complexities of having a larger system. Not to mention that it's already problematic to think that you can rely on tax cattle to actually get this job done in a sustainable and efficient way.

We'll give it a shot anyways.

"DURRRRR"

Yeah I'm sure the gamefaqs conservatroll who is on his 29th account and apparently wanted to start a garbage company using homeless men as employees or something is very knowledgeable on universal health care and its implications.

LOL

Sad!

"HODOR!!!!!!!!!"

Like, the while outrage that spurred this topic is confusing
---

Doesn't most of the bloat in healthcare come from legal considerations rather than cost of labor?
---

Anteaterking posted...

Doesn't most of the bloat in healthcare come from legal considerations rather than cost of labor?

A lot of the bloat comes from the fact health insurance companies demand discounts so places are forced to raise their prices so that the discounted price still pays for everything.
---

Transcendentia posted...

I'll just start a company and start proving that it's the correct course of action.

Except you won't
---

Trigg3rH4ppy posted...

Transcendentia posted...

I'll just start a company and start proving that it's the correct course of action.

Except you won't

I might not succeed but I'll definitely try. Maybe I'll even live-stream some coding sessions and open source the code from the get-go. It'd be a non-profit in this case.

emblem boy posted...

Like, the while outrage that spurred this topic is confusing

It's Proudclad, if he wasn't feigning outrage at something I'd suspect we were all dead.
---

Lmao at getting modded for "disruptive posting" just because I tagged someone

Transcendentia posted...

Lmao at getting modded for "disruptive posting" just because I tagged someone

Yeah god forbid quoting your own post and doing nothing but tagging someone to try and egg them into a response is disruptive posting
---

The first three paragraphs of his opening post are absolutely correct.
There are issues with the fourth since the reality is that most of the decision makers on both the left and the right are stuck within the current framework and fail to realize that there's no solution within it. Neither private nor public insurance will solve the problem since the insurance method of health care fails when the supply of healthy people is declining relative to the overall population.
---

uwnim posted...

The first three paragraphs of his opening post are absolutely correct.
There are issues with the fourth since the reality is that most of the decision makers on both the left and the right are stuck within the current framework and fail to realize that there's no solution within it. Neither private nor public insurance will solve the problem since the insurance method of health care fails when the supply of healthy people is declining relative to the overall population.

You are 100% correct. It'd be an awful situation to create millions of jobs in a paradigm that requires there to be sick people. Becaudr what happens when people get healthier, which is the goal pf real healthcare? What happens if the monetary incentive sides with treating symptoms rather than making people healthier?

And In the mean time, we should abolish health insurance and institute universal healthcare.
---

Sir, multiple people have asked you about your previous business ventures. It would be rude to not address these claims.
---

literal_garbage posted...

Sir, multiple people have asked you about your previous business ventures. It would be rude to not address these claims.

@Transcendentia
---

medicine and surgeries and preventive care are only as expensive as they are because of the human costs in place

red tape and regulation
---

hockeybub89 posted...

And In the mean time, we should abolish health insurance and institute universal healthcare.

Then it'll go the way of public education - tremendous amounts of funding, only ever increasing the amount of funding, yet no results a la Chicago Public Schools.

It's been damn near 100 years and public education has not changed.