Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Lindsay Qu's avatar

Haven’t finished the whole thing yet but I would read entire books written like detailed versions of section 2 lol

Expand full comment
Calvin McCarter's avatar

You provide pretty conclusive evidence that AI can't make better decisions than the current system, but isn't this also evidence that AI (perhaps with slightly-cynical prompting) can also do not-worse than the current system? And if this is the case, then AI might still be adopted eventually. A pretty substantial fraction of the expenses (both cash and equity) of a typical biotech will go towards the people who make such decisions. And at least some of the development time goes towards making such decisions. So adopting AI, even if not transformative, could still help reduce costs. (This does mean that making such an AI isn't a viable startup, since one can't charge more than the expected cost savings.) I guess the counterpoint is that having smart, respected, and experienced people making these decisions is necessary to gain confidence from the investors and the company staff. But the counter-counterpoint is that, depending on how public perception of AI evolves, people might eventually trust AI even more for these decisions.

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts