this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2026
971 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

82460 readers
3968 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Soup@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

LLMs and chatbots should not be giving medical advice. You are afraid of the private healthcare system, not the lack of access to the most janky bandaid fix for its failures.

[–] moroninahurry@piefed.social -3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Neither should Wikipedia or Google. So I guess by your logic nobody should search or learn about medical conditions on a computer.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 hours ago

I guess by your logic nobody should search or learn about medical conditions on a computer.

How else would we know the TRUTH about 5G vaccines and invermectin? Or the cures of Apple Cider vinegar?

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

You know damn well there’s an important difference related to the confidence of a bot that has been a key problem since this whole thing started.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

The line between medical advice and personal research is pretty freaking gray, so banning medical advice. Does that also ban talking to llms about anything that is medical adjacent?

Does medical adjacent mean personal disabilities? Drug related interests? Pet health? Stretches? Pain support?

Anything that falls under "Health, Wellness, and Fitness"?

...etc

It's a slippery slope and we don't need to be sliding down it

[–] moroninahurry@piefed.social -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

People are so vicious over this tech they would rather have disabled poor people with cancer suffer and die under inadequate care than do anything about the inadequate care. Ban the tech, but let this all go on.

If you are perfectly able and well, you can ignore all advice that isn't perfect.

The perspective they seem to lack is frightening. The empathy they refuse to engage is massive. This is able-ism.

Tech companies are bad, but use of tech will cure and ease cancer, HIV, and chronic disease. Bring on the downvotes.

[–] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

I think you may be falling into a false dichotomy. Not only is the choice being presented a bad one, it ignores real solutions to the root problem, leaving us to argue over the crappy "band-aid" solution to it.

I believe that people needing health care should have no reason to ask a chat bot about their symptoms because they can ask a helpful doctor instead. The fact that they can't do that is the problem, not their access or lack of it to the chat bot.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

“Would rather have disabled people with cancer suffer and die…”

My guy, that’s not a lack of LLM access, it’s a completely fucked US healthcare system that forces people onto the internet because they can’t get what they need from the state, you goofy-ass weirdo.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 hours ago

“Would rather have disabled people with cancer suffer and die…”

chatbots are shit doctors.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world -2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (2 children)

Well yes of course but also restricting access to information machines doesn't exactly help much either.

[–] SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

I hate to break it to you but.. they're not really "information machines". Google search is a better information machine.

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

Do hallucinating LLMs, that have done such things as convince a child to commit suicide before, really count as “information machines”? The Mayo clinic website might take a single whole other braincell to read through but at least it’ll be written properly.

I mean, the fact that you consider these programs to have enough credibility to be called “information machines” is exactly why they’re so potentially dangerous.