> Anyone trying to make a new mainstream language is completely insane, unless they're backed by a huge corporation. There are only two exceptions in the last 25 years that come close: Scala and Kotlin.
Much less effort to build a language (without megacorp backing) if you're building off a battle tested runtime.
I'm absolutely not saying this to discredit the work that's gone into Clojure, Elixir et al, but it does lend credence to the idea of building for an existing ecosystem instead of bootstrapping your own (along with "seamless" interop as a first class concern)
If anyone can crack seamless interop between natively compiled languages to dodge ABI hell they'll earn a nice place in history
They should also hold prescribers accountable. As a certified physician you hold powers and responsibilities. In many countries these prescribers would lose their licence.
The fact that this is completely unmentioned in the article really surprised me. The physicians may not have done insurance fraud, but they absolutely committed medical malpractice, and they did so for the sake of personal profit.
I don't understand how a hardware company who just reported its largest quarterly loss in history with revenue down 36% year-over-year [1] is working on fonts. Or maybe this explains that.
Companies compromise of multiple people. Different people can work on different projects. The design team may wish to improve the company image by releasing a font named after them that people may like, improving their public relations.
I understand your concerns. Our objectives are, on the contrary, to reduce the doctor/patient distance that was created by EHRs and all the required administrative processes. We already measure that when AI takes care of this stuff, doctors do better engage with patients.
In the meantime:
- we offer a GDPR compliant EU-based hosting option
- we don't store anything (no audio, no transcript, no note): it's stateless and all erased at the end of each consultation
- data is pseudonomyzed as it flows though our systems
Our first customers (large healthcare orgs) have been OK with this so far!
First question - you say that you don't store anything (no audio, no transcript, no note), but your legal agreement says that in order to use this service, the doctor asserts to you that they have gotten consent from the patient for you to reuse all data processed through the service for research and development, and to improve the performance, models, and algorithms of this or any other solution you come up with in the future. Why the difference and how do you square A with B?
"Due to the substantial financial, material and human investments made by NABLA within the framework of the Contract for the development and updating of the Solution, NABLA wish to be allowed to reuse the data processed within the framework of the Contract.
The CLIENT, when applicable in the name and on behalf of the DATA CONTROLLER, warrants that the Data Subjects have been informed of their rights and have given their consent for the use of their data within the framework of the Contract when required by applicable laws or the Regulation and authorizes the DATA PROCESSOR to reuse the Data processed within the framework of the Contract, as long as the latter undertakes to comply with the Regulation for all of this Data, for the uses listed below:
- research and development of the Solution,
- improving the performance, models and algorithms developed and trained by NABLA in the context of the Solution or any other solution published by NABLA,"
Second question - you say that you don't store anything (no audio, no transcript, no note) and that it is all erased at the end of each consultation. But do you store any artifacts derived from the audio, transcript, or notes of a consultation, like data processed directly or indirectly from the audio, transcripts, or notes of a consultation that is fed in to an AI model, ML model, or other dataset that you persist after the consultation?
I am in this space, dealing with similar problems with similar organizations. Any DPO that is not listing you as a shared controller will be acting illegally. And they might, its still a grey area, but how many of those assesments can you handle before your CAC becomes too much? Don't get me wrong I really think that it can help a lot on HCLS space if you want to chat more shoot me an email contact_vdk@proton.me
