Licensure is needed for payment. Are insurance companies going to start paying for autonomous AI?
Cosmos - 4 weeks ago
How about both regulated AND licensed? I doubt the FDA will want to give up any power in this fight.
Brian Too - 4 weeks ago
AI right now is like a toddler with a knife.
Therefore, the answer is Neither because AI shouldn't be used autonomously. Yes, I know people will do it anyway. And there will be troubles galore! Heart-rending stories. People saying "I was not informed!" All of it.
AI has a long way to go before it can be trusted with autonomous mode. Meanwhile, treat it like a toddler.
J R Bak - 4 weeks ago
I'm going with regulated like a medical device, because it strikes me that its digital nature makes safety and efficacy analysis (and "good manufacturing processes") at least somewhat possible. Post-approval "real world evidence" collection should be required.
Next interesting step is malpractice/ liability insurance. I'm guessing the actuaries aren't quite sure what to do with that yet. I'm also guessing the AI service providers don't want any part of it. The legal scholars can start opining about how the standard of care gets established, and courts will eventually sort it out.
In providing medical care for people, things go wrong. In our country, paying for the downstream care is through liability insurance, which would spread the cost over every AI transaction.
Self-driving cars and auto insurance is somewhat analogous.
Licensure is needed for payment. Are insurance companies going to start paying for autonomous AI?
How about both regulated AND licensed? I doubt the FDA will want to give up any power in this fight.
AI right now is like a toddler with a knife.
Therefore, the answer is Neither because AI shouldn't be used autonomously. Yes, I know people will do it anyway. And there will be troubles galore! Heart-rending stories. People saying "I was not informed!" All of it.
AI has a long way to go before it can be trusted with autonomous mode. Meanwhile, treat it like a toddler.
I'm going with regulated like a medical device, because it strikes me that its digital nature makes safety and efficacy analysis (and "good manufacturing processes") at least somewhat possible. Post-approval "real world evidence" collection should be required.
Next interesting step is malpractice/ liability insurance. I'm guessing the actuaries aren't quite sure what to do with that yet. I'm also guessing the AI service providers don't want any part of it. The legal scholars can start opining about how the standard of care gets established, and courts will eventually sort it out.
In providing medical care for people, things go wrong. In our country, paying for the downstream care is through liability insurance, which would spread the cost over every AI transaction.
Self-driving cars and auto insurance is somewhat analogous.