riverrataggie said:

---

Pinochet said:

---

riverrataggie said:

---

Cynic said:

---

How will we know when AI gets something wrong if we no longer understand anything?

---

Because we don't value right or wrong anymore. Just who finishes first.

---

Good lord. First my girlfriend and now you complaining about who finishes first?

---

Well done.

---

I'd argue otherwise, given the complaints

I have worked in Radiology almost 20 yrs now. And can assure you Radiologist are are screwed. Truth be known they miss so many obvious things it blows my mind on images we send to them. Definitely need AI to at least double check their reads.

The age of experts and specialists is coming to a swift end. Intelligence is going to get very cheap

When does all of this go from theory to actually happening?

AggielandPoultry said:

---

I have worked in Radiology almost 20 yrs now. And can assure you Radiologist are are screwed. Truth be known they miss so many obvious things it blows my mind on images we send to them. Definitely need AI to at least double check their reads.

---

Yes, I think Radiology is cooked. However I heard that Radiologists make a ton of money. Is it true?

I don’t think people realize how big this is.

GPT-5 is now proposing experiments, executing them in autonomous labs, learning from the results, and iterating.

36,000+ reactions.
40% cost reduction.

This is not software anymore.
This is automated scientific progress. https://t.co/jH06lcqe7G

— VraserX e/acc (@VraserX) February 5, 2026

So many of you don't get it. The future is going to be like nothing we have ever seen before.

Spergin said:

---

I don’t think people realize how big this is.

GPT-5 is now proposing experiments, executing them in autonomous labs, learning from the results, and iterating.

36,000+ reactions.
40% cost reduction.

This is not software anymore.
This is automated scientific progress. https://t.co/jH06lcqe7G

— VraserX e/acc (@VraserX) February 5, 2026

So many of you don't get it. The future is going to be like nothing we have ever seen before.

---

This is a self-promotional x post from Open AI...Where are the results? Is there a profit and stock price positively affected by this exact experiment? What product was created? where precisely is the productivity benefit manifesting itself?

I'm not nec doubting this is the future. But is this the internet in 1999 where we're way out over our skis about to bust?

Learn to be a plumber.

Learn a physical skill.

David Kipping is an interesting guy and fun to listen to but makes his money not as an assistant astronomy professor at Columbia but by being a provocative Youtube streamer. This video is a great example of his shtick.

His only claim was that Astronomy PhDs are now outsourcing the coding of their research to AI Code Agents because they are better than they are.

And that is an interesting claim I suppose but it is counter-weighted by a large chunk of the professional coding industry that is still pretty frustrated with Agentic AI Coding solutions.

But his breathless and name droppy way of discussing it and then linking it to some other topic like the dangers of superior intelligences as competitors convinces half of his listeners that he is making some grander and more profound insight.

When will real intelligence return?

Quote:

---

Looks like a great time to retire.

---

Officially retired for 7 days. Freshman…..Wildcat!!!

Huge electrical manufacturing company, really starting to immerse everyone in AI. Really neat technology everything from summarizing meeting to composing emails. Just wasn't for me…too old I guess.


Retire from SE?

Quote:

---

The future is going to be like nothing we have ever seen before.

---

For most of history this has been true!

Spergin said:

---

... The future is going to be like nothing we have ever seen before.

---

You're up for a Texag top-10 Yogi Berra prize.

Spergin said:

---

Seamaster said:

---

I keep hearing things like this and simultaneously, in real time, I see how AI is incredibly inconsistent and often times just makes things up.

And I see how the music and movies that AI make are shallow and tellingly not the real thing.

---

This is how I know your information is 6+ months out of date. Hallucinations do occur but nothing like they used to. It can analyze better than any human can already.

If you're not keeping up with what is happening you absolutely should. It's happening at breakneck speed to such an extent that every tech company is in a near constant fire drill state. My friends who are programmers in that world say this constantly and no one can keep up.

---

Degree of hallucinations is actually a setting when developing an AI tool. Not sure why it's set so high on the chat gpt like free access tools. Perhaps they want to allow more creativity.

bmks270 said:

---

5-10% bull**** rate of hallucinations is still too frequent to ever replace humans.

AI will spew a bunch of jargon, and humans will have to filter the outputs to what nonsense and what is true insights worth considering.

Problems arise when no more experts exist to do the filtering because all of the he roles were replaced by AI and new experts were created to replace those that retire.

---

They are only getting better. Yes it still makes mistakes. But fewer than I saw from many of data centric peers in industry.

And if you are getting that many hallucinations, your prompts are crappy.

I have several different, multipage prompts. They all have the AI do validity checking on all inputs and data, as well as computations, table construction, source citations, ... while using multi agent "teams" to handle various perspectives and/or sequencing.

And I am using AI for fun. I am sure the guys/gals doing this for real are generally doing a much better job than I.

Logos Stick said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Tex117 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Tex117 said:

---

AozorAg said:

---

I've tried using the most expensive AI tools available in my law practice, and I would still be committing malpractice if I didn't redo most of it myself. Whatever everybody is seeing in the hard sciences, it's not showing up in the legal world. Also I expect we're going to get some state legislation prohibiting AI practice of law in various forms in the near future. I think my job is safe for another decade or so at least.

---

Yeah, its not quite capable of high level legal work yet. But, is it as good as a 1-3 year actually good associate? Yes.

s it a good editor in terms of writing your thoughts down and needing it streamlined? Absolutely.

---

Agree completely.

I have gone from review docs/fact -> traditional research -> drafting/writing -> review/final edits

to

Get facts/docs -> put into AI -.> verify/edit.

It speeds everything up.

---

What it has done with document review is incredible. There is no question the legal field is going to change significantly. But man....as a law student right now...I would be VERY concerned about getting a job.

---

What still blows my mind is I can now upload Xrays, etc... and it can read it.

---

No it can't.

It can only regurgitate what data says about similar x-rays.

The only fields that are in trouble are archaeology and paleontology.

---

I don't care about the methodology of how it's doing its thing. That's irrelevant. There are studies that show it performs as well or better than human docs at spotting abnormalities like tumors in x-rays. And it does it in seconds.

---

But it's not going to find anything new.

It's going to classify everything it "sees" according to things seen in the past. Misdiagnoses will endure because that's what 100% of past data said it was. …1 of 1.

Spergin said:

---

I don’t think people realize how big this is.

GPT-5 is now proposing experiments, executing them in autonomous labs, learning from the results, and iterating.

36,000+ reactions.
40% cost reduction.

This is not software anymore.
This is automated scientific progress. https://t.co/jH06lcqe7G

— VraserX e/acc (@VraserX) February 5, 2026

So many of you don't get it. The future is going to be like nothing we have ever seen before.

---

What questions is it asking?

…or is it just changing every variable to build a database?

TexasRebel said:

---

What questions is it asking?

…or is it just changing every variable to build a database?

---

You should at least know that that's not how AI works

TexasRebel said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Tex117 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Tex117 said:

---

AozorAg said:

---

I've tried using the most expensive AI tools available in my law practice, and I would still be committing malpractice if I didn't redo most of it myself. Whatever everybody is seeing in the hard sciences, it's not showing up in the legal world. Also I expect we're going to get some state legislation prohibiting AI practice of law in various forms in the near future. I think my job is safe for another decade or so at least.

---

Yeah, its not quite capable of high level legal work yet. But, is it as good as a 1-3 year actually good associate? Yes.

s it a good editor in terms of writing your thoughts down and needing it streamlined? Absolutely.

---

Agree completely.

I have gone from review docs/fact -> traditional research -> drafting/writing -> review/final edits

to

Get facts/docs -> put into AI -.> verify/edit.

It speeds everything up.

---

What it has done with document review is incredible. There is no question the legal field is going to change significantly. But man....as a law student right now...I would be VERY concerned about getting a job.

---

What still blows my mind is I can now upload Xrays, etc... and it can read it.

---

No it can't.

It can only regurgitate what data says about similar x-rays.

The only fields that are in trouble are archaeology and paleontology.

---

I don't care about the methodology of how it's doing its thing. That's irrelevant. There are studies that show it performs as well or better than human docs at spotting abnormalities like tumors in x-rays. And it does it in seconds.

---

But it's not going to find anything new.

It's going to classify everything it "sees" according to things seen in the past. Misdiagnoses will endure because that's what 100% of past data said it was. …1 of 1.

---

No they wont. If it is a misdiagnosis and something "new", it will be studied by medical researchers - who also have no idea what this "new" thing is - and the engine will be trained on it. The human docs will also misdiagnosis it because they also classify everything based on what they have learned and seen in the past. The engine could also be programmed to flag: I see an anomaly that I've never "seen" before and I don't know what it is.

For the world we do know, it's better and faster. If you give me the choice between AI image analysis and a human radiologist, I'm picking AI.

AozorAg said:

---

I've tried using the most expensive AI tools available in my law practice, and I would still be committing malpractice if I didn't redo most of it myself. Whatever everybody is seeing in the hard sciences, it's not showing up in the legal world. Also I expect we're going to get some state legislation prohibiting AI practice of law in various forms in the near future. I think my job is safe for another decade or so at least.

---

I do not think that AI is going to replace lawyers in the near term, but if you aren't using it in your practice you are really missing out and behind the times.

For filing legal briefs, we have all seen the stories of hallucinated case law. That's not what I am referring to.

Document review, propounding discovery, drafting demands, oral argument prep, creating demonstrative exhibits, drafting contract provisions, drafting deposition questions, etc. AI has changed the game on all of these things.

I was at a seminar recently where the speaker asked the room of about 200 lawyers how many used AI in some capacity in their practice. All but maybe 10 raised their hands! I was floored by that.

podcast yesterday where actress Katee Sackhoff (Starbuck) and her husband were watching for the first time

Battlestar Galactica

a story about how the robots were built by humans

then took over, fought a war, then launched a surprise nuclear strike wiping out most of humanity and the planet. only the low-tech Galactica was safe.

this was created TWENTY THREE YEARS AGO

LMCane said:

---

podcast yesterday where actress Katee Sackhoff (Starbuck) and her husband were watching for the first time

Battlestar Galactica

a story about how the robots were built by humans

then took over, fought a war, then launched a surprise nuclear strike wiping out most of humanity and the planet. only the low-tech Galactica was safe.

this was created TWENTY THREE YEARS AGO

---

And is arguably the greatest sci-fi show ever made. Highly recommend.

Now go read Dune which was written 61 years ago and is based on the premise that humans had to kill AI and outlaw it.

infinity ag said:

---

AggielandPoultry said:

---

I have worked in Radiology almost 20 yrs now. And can assure you Radiologist are are screwed. Truth be known they miss so many obvious things it blows my mind on images we send to them. Definitely need AI to at least double check their reads.

---

Yes, they do and are often very odd people. Some say that is why they are alone llooking at images all day and not seeing patients.

Yes, I think Radiology is cooked. However I heard that Radiologists make a ton of money. Is it true?

---

History just happened.

An AI system has autonomously solved a long standing open conjecture in pure mathematics (Fel’s open conjecture on syzygies of numerical semigroups) building a complete formal proof in Lean with zero human input.

This is the first time in history an… https://t.co/shWlwO7gAi

— Dr Singularity (@Dr_Singularity) February 6, 2026

Don't continue sticking your head in the sand. AI is discovering new things all of the time.

infinity ag said:

---

AggielandPoultry said:

---

I have worked in Radiology almost 20 yrs now. And can assure you Radiologist are are screwed. Truth be known they miss so many obvious things it blows my mind on images we send to them. Definitely need AI to at least double check their reads.

---

Yes, I think Radiology is cooked. However I heard that Radiologists make a ton of money. Is it true?

---

Im an interventional radiology resident so I can speak on this. Many radiologists make well into the 7 figures, I know a bit making 2-3 million. Ive gotten multiple recruiter emails daily for 700k+ starting as the floor and im not even looking for jobs (pgy3, IR is 6 years post med school), the demand is pretty insane. Its not 2+2=4 like lots of people outside of the field think it is, AI within radiology is much more advanced then what is available to the public, and the demand keeps growing. A liver MRI now has like 10-14 phases, and only radiologists who did a body fellowship reads these, that wasnt the case 5-10 years ago. Also, as a radiologist, you come out a diagnostic radiologist and a general radiologist- which is very procedural if image interpretation were to ever get impacted. Then you can subspecialize from there and lots of the subspecialties have very lucrative procedures (MSK rads doing cash pay carpal tunel releases, breast rads doing breast biopsies and ablations, IR and body rads doing ganlgion blocks, IR doing cash pay varicose veins, I could go on).

The fields in medicine that are at most risk are those in which midlevels practice near independently and/or are algorithmic (which is almost all clinical based field)

AggielandPoultry said:

---

I have worked in Radiology almost 20 yrs now. And can assure you Radiologist are are screwed. Truth be known they miss so many obvious things it blows my mind on images we send to them. Definitely need AI to at least double check their reads.

---

By all means give it your best shot at a study then

Not trying to be an ahole, but I d be saving my money if I were in your shoes.

I think the market for your field is in serious jeopardy.

Give this a listen, then mock it, dismiss it and hope.

Anthropic CEO:

Software engineering will be completely obsolete in 6-12 months… pic.twitter.com/EwKq8l7HE7

— ₕₐₘₚₜₒₙ (@hamptonism) February 5, 2026

riverrataggie said:

---

Pinochet said:

---

riverrataggie said:

---

Cynic said:

---

How will we know when AI gets something wrong if we no longer understand anything?

---

Because we don't value right or wrong anymore. Just who finishes first.

---

Good lord. First my girlfriend and now you complaining about who finishes first?

---

Well done.

---

That's NOT what she said!

Goldman Sachs is rolling out Anthropic’s AI model to automate accounting and compliance roles completely.

Anthropic engineers have been embedded at Goldman for 6 months, co-developing systems that act like “digital co-workers” for high-volume, process-heavy tasks.

The new setup… pic.twitter.com/KMvQkkTAMs

— Rohan Paul (@rohanpaul_ai) February 6, 2026

Im Gipper said:

---

AozorAg said:

---

I've tried using the most expensive AI tools available in my law practice, and I would still be committing malpractice if I didn't redo most of it myself. Whatever everybody is seeing in the hard sciences, it's not showing up in the legal world. Also I expect we're going to get some state legislation prohibiting AI practice of law in various forms in the near future. I think my job is safe for another decade or so at least.

---

I do not think that AI is going to replace lawyers in the near term, but if you aren't using it in your practice you are really missing out and behind the times.

For filing legal briefs, we have all seen the stories of hallucinated case law. That's not what I am referring to.

Document review, propounding discovery, drafting demands, oral argument prep, creating demonstrative exhibits, drafting contract provisions, drafting deposition questions, etc. AI has changed the game on all of these things.

I was at a seminar recently where the speaker asked the room of about 200 lawyers how many used AI in some capacity in their practice. All but maybe 10 raised their hands! I was floored by that.

---

Law will never go full AI because lawyers craft the laws. They aren't going to legislate themselves out of a job. Sort of how they conveniently aren't held to non-competes like the rest of us plebs

Lol pic.twitter.com/xvqdSHkr3K

— Rob Freund (@RobertFreundLaw) February 6, 2026

Logos Stick said:

---

Give this a listen, then mock it, dismiss it and hope.

Anthropic CEO:

Software engineering will be completely obsolete in 6-12 months… pic.twitter.com/EwKq8l7HE7

— ₕₐₘₚₜₒₙ (@hamptonism) February 5, 2026

---

All I know is AI is really bad at writing robust code.

AI also isn't much use offline.

Logos Stick said:

---

Not trying to be an ahole, but I d be saving my money if I were in your shoes.

I think the market for your field is in serious jeopardy.

---

Im pretty good with my money, thanks though. Radiology (especially interventional or breast) is very well set up for the future compared to other specialties. AI will impact everyone

I'm ready for some AI newscasters and weathermen.