AI led to an increase in radiologists, not a decrease

https://www.ft.com/content/f2e03bd9-af67-45c4-8e1e-79978b5bc48f

Comments

resfirestarDec 5, 2025, 9:28 PM
>Some were the sorts of teething issues that one might expect to get better over time, such as trouble integrating AI with existing IT infrastructure. Others were more fundamental. AI tools create new tasks and responsibilities, such as “post-deployment monitoring”, which involves “auditing to make sure [the tool] is still performing at the level of accuracy [that was] on the tin,” as she put it.

This is the kind of process that happens with any new technology. Hinton probably just didn't know because he's never worked outside of academia. A common problem with people commenting about "the future of work", AI-related or otherwise.

wahernDec 5, 2025, 9:42 PM
> This is the kind of process that happens with any new technology. Hinton probably just didn't know because he's never worked outside of academia.

Economists certainly know this, as would many historians.

antipaulDec 5, 2025, 8:41 PM
If there was one application where deep learning was supposed to succeed, it was radiology

"people should stop training radiologists now" – Hinton, 2016

Legend2440Dec 5, 2025, 9:37 PM
Per the article, it did succeed. AI radiology tools are being widely adopted, and they work very well.

But they are being used by radiologists, not instead of radiologists. And because scans can be interpreted more quickly and cheaply, more scans are ordered, which has increased the demand for radiologists overall.

WhyOhWhyQDec 6, 2025, 2:29 AM
Probably a cliche, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
classichasclassDec 5, 2025, 9:19 PM
https://archive.md/zK1vG