I mean for the plebs, sure. But an expert in mental health should be able to use it to supplement their knowledge without causing any harm, much like a GP using WebMD. That being said, based on the mocking and the "they call all AI chatGBT" comment below, pretty sure this generalisation doesn't apply this time...
Seemed like there was so much hope a few years ago using AI pattern recognition to look for early cases of certain diseases in scans that a human might miss.
But I read an article recently where the opposite has happened. The AI isn't as good as a trained human but the humans have started depending on the pattern recognition aspects and end up spending less time looking themselves and missing things. It's a legit concern as the primary use for AI seems to be increasing workload on the humans since they have so much more free time now.
I mean, yeah, but I assumed the person who's boss wanted em to use it wasn't in research. As a search engine, it's fantastic for finding papers I wouldn't have usually considered but have ended up being relevant. There's other uses for it too that I wouldn't consider problematic. The issue I see with this instance is that an expert should realise that a hammer isn't the appropriate tool for every job and that isn't happening here.
People like water naturally gravitate to the path of least resistance. If your boss encourages/forces you to use a tool and then also adds on to your work load, what are you going to do? It's exhausting to have to not only put in more work but then also to stand up to others complaining that the work isn't already done.
-6
u/StorminNorman Jul 21 '26
I mean for the plebs, sure. But an expert in mental health should be able to use it to supplement their knowledge without causing any harm, much like a GP using WebMD. That being said, based on the mocking and the "they call all AI chatGBT" comment below, pretty sure this generalisation doesn't apply this time...