<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Why would we second-guess the algorithm?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://sorrywatch.com/why-would-we-second-guess-the-algorithm/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://sorrywatch.com/why-would-we-second-guess-the-algorithm/</link>
	<description>Analyzing apologies in the news, media, history and literature. We condemn the bad and exalt the good.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2020 09:34:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Kenneth H. Ryesky		</title>
		<link>https://sorrywatch.com/why-would-we-second-guess-the-algorithm/#comment-215768</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kenneth H. Ryesky]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2020 09:34:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sorrywatch.com/?p=10281#comment-215768</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: bratschegirl		</title>
		<link>https://sorrywatch.com/why-would-we-second-guess-the-algorithm/#comment-215743</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[bratschegirl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Dec 2020 00:20:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sorrywatch.com/?p=10281#comment-215743</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Stanford medicine seems to worship algorithms. My spouse (70+, male) sees a cardiologist in the Stanford system. The cardio practice uses an algorithm to determine who should and should not be on statins. This algorithm is constructed in such a way that given his age, there is literally no combination of other information that can be fed in that won&#039;t produce a recommendation that the patient should go on a statin. Excellent cholesterol and blood pressure numbers? Doesn&#039;t matter, the almighty algo still says &quot;take a statin.&quot;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stanford medicine seems to worship algorithms. My spouse (70+, male) sees a cardiologist in the Stanford system. The cardio practice uses an algorithm to determine who should and should not be on statins. This algorithm is constructed in such a way that given his age, there is literally no combination of other information that can be fed in that won&#8217;t produce a recommendation that the patient should go on a statin. Excellent cholesterol and blood pressure numbers? Doesn&#8217;t matter, the almighty algo still says &#8220;take a statin.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: sumac		</title>
		<link>https://sorrywatch.com/why-would-we-second-guess-the-algorithm/#comment-215729</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[sumac]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2020 23:09:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sorrywatch.com/?p=10281#comment-215729</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://sorrywatch.com/why-would-we-second-guess-the-algorithm/#comment-215723&quot;&gt;paulina borsook&lt;/a&gt;.

Oh yes. Here&#039;s a &lt;em&gt;San Francisco Chronicle&lt;/em&gt; article where they actually got to see the algorithm, and compare it with, say, that of UCSF:

https://www.sfchronicle.com/health/article/How-Stanford-s-vaccine-algorithm-caused-a-major-15824918.php

They quote Ziad Obermeyer, who wrote about this for &lt;em&gt;MIT Technology Review&lt;/em&gt;, as saying &quot;...the goal of algorithms should be to make... prioritization fair, transparent, and defensible. No one should hide behind &#039;an error in the algorithm,&#039; as if the algorithm as a mind of its own, when they literally designed the algorithm.&quot;
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://sorrywatch.com/why-would-we-second-guess-the-algorithm/#comment-215723">paulina borsook</a>.</p>
<p>Oh yes. Here&#8217;s a <em>San Francisco Chronicle</em> article where they actually got to see the algorithm, and compare it with, say, that of UCSF:</p>
<p><a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/health/article/How-Stanford-s-vaccine-algorithm-caused-a-major-15824918.php" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.sfchronicle.com/health/article/How-Stanford-s-vaccine-algorithm-caused-a-major-15824918.php</a></p>
<p>They quote Ziad Obermeyer, who wrote about this for <em>MIT Technology Review</em>, as saying &#8220;&#8230;the goal of algorithms should be to make&#8230; prioritization fair, transparent, and defensible. No one should hide behind &#8216;an error in the algorithm,&#8217; as if the algorithm as a mind of its own, when they literally designed the algorithm.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: paulina borsook		</title>
		<link>https://sorrywatch.com/why-would-we-second-guess-the-algorithm/#comment-215723</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[paulina borsook]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sorrywatch.com/?p=10281#comment-215723</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[has there been any followon to this?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>has there been any followon to this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
