https://www.beckerspayer.com/executive-moves/unitedhealth-group-taps-ai-chief/
11 replies (most recent on top)
@OP Some yes some no. Depends on the job and how AI is used. Some of the chatbots are just really bad including one used at one of the clinics owned by Optum.
What is more concerning is how the data annotators are chosen and who determines perspective. Given Sandeeps comment here:
https://businesschief.com/news/how-is-unitedhealths-optum-insights-ceo-strategising-ai
I'm guessing he is searching for an annotator partner and that is were it can become messy. Hopefully he and Julie will go away once chief AI scientist Dr. Pencina comes aboard. He has has a deeper health background than Julie and Sandeep...he's made it happen.
Humans code the AI you tw-t waffle that’s where the errors come in, to be fully automated without human intervention would mean it pulls from other sources. Which is created by humans. So they’re will always be some bias. If you are this emotionally charged over an anonymous layoff site you don’t belong in AI or any tech field.
@hn You're a fu--ing mo--n if you think AI is inferior to humans. AI has no biases, no emotions clouding judgment, and processes information at lightning speed. Humans? They're slow, biased, and prone to errors. AI is the future, and you're just a relic of the past. Get with the program, or get left behind, you fu--ing tu-d.
Glad to see almost all the troll comments got deleted.
While I agreed with serval of the ones previously posted, AI still has a long way to go. Yes it has a wealth of knowledge and information but it is going by what it’s being fed. I think everyone can agree not all web platforms, academic and news sources are 100% unbiased, and since AI is being used to cut down on production, increase productivity, and produce more revenue for the company. There will be human errors in making the code if they don’t handle the problems that already exist. It’ll just be automated and cause more issues. I can see the vision, but I also see the potential for so much human error and having to backtrack. AI has its place in healthcare, just don’t think it handling claims and dealing with members is the way to go: Imaging and helping with diagnosis in hospital and clinic settings is where it could thrive if done right.
@h6 Stop spreading your nonsense. You ret4rded id--t just don't know how to use AI.
Stop replying to trolls. They don’t go away with logic or reason, just downvote and ignore.
I agree with @a4 AI is extremely expensive. It has benefits in a copilot way where we can build things a bit faster especially things we would normally have to dig through documentation for. However, this will absolutely not be good code unless steered by an actual engineer. Vibe coding (having AI write almost all the code) is futile. At a certain point it loses context and cannot get itself out of loops.
It isn’t at the point that our executives think it is. That doesn’t mean it isn’t helpful but it means it shouldn’t be shoved into every product “just because”. It’s so bad at Optum right now that they say if you don’t work on a project where you build AI features, you won’t get a 4 or 5 on your review.
@f1 Not Optum, lol.
Who's going to do the innovation? Offshore still isn't going to do anything, the US engineers are stretched thin, who's going to do the innovation? Who's going to build actual viable AI solutions and not slop that goes nowhere? Who's going to do it?
Can the troll be banned or something? He accounts for 95% of all posts here.
Anyways, AI is going to continue onwards at Optum even if UHC is a bit hamstringed… 100x the Detail!
The AI bagholder in this thread is too emotionally tied to his portfolio. Our part of Optum was told to suspend RFPs we are doing on generative AI tools/licenses as part of a cost savings initiative.
People ranting about “become an AI programmer” are the same as those telling everyone to become a “computer repair man” 25 years ago. Sure those jobs exist, in very very very small outsourced numbers.
UHG like most companies is realizing this will be something outsourced to an AI company who bears most if not all indemnity.
Yes, many companies are trying to use ai and investing a lot of money. However, AI doesn't give truthful or factual and/or misinformation. And many corporations are learning that the investment they have put in so far into AI is not showing returns in profits. Also, the energy used to run AI and data centers is not only ruining climate with overheating earth, but the cost of the electricity is increasing drastically. As data centers go up and start to run, communities that have them in their towns will notice the huge cost that will be distributed to them and will want to kick them out. Not sure if AI will go as far as corporations think it will ( with 24/7 always on) with easy profits. Just look at Tesla's FSD. They have been working on it for years, and still they need a human in the passenger seat for robotaxi. If AI doesn't show huge profits for corporations, you'll start seeing a slowdown in capital expenditure for AI.