It does, along with many other formats.
135 karma · joined May 14, 2025
At the risk of spamming this thread, check out FluidCad. It has excellent GUI based cad tools, and those same tools generate the equivalent 'code cad' for each operation. Of course you can also use 'code first' instead.
I think it's really exciting, and while it's early in development it is already very usable.
I have a 40 minute drive to work each way, and I find audiobooks the best way to pass the time. At night if I want to read the same book from my drive, Kindle picks up exactly where I stopped listening. And does the reverse the next morning when I get in the car.
If any else is doing this, I am unaware. But it's AWESOME.
My main complaint is Amazon has discontinued Kindle devices with physical page turn buttons. Whoever made that decision should be fired.
Here are my opinions, after a 20 year career as a diagnostic radiologist, and 45 years as a hobbyist computer programmer
1. There are no products currently on the market that can replace a radiologist.
2. If you can't fully and completely replace radiologists, you will still need them around in significant numbers.
3. Because of the infinite variation in human anatomy, physiology, and pathology, it is my opinion that AGI will be required to fully and completely replace radiologists.
4. Once AI is strong enough to replace radiologists, it will be strong enough to replace every other job as well.
5. Based on current RVU compensation models, any cost savings achieved by hospitals replacing radiologists with AI will quickly be lost by reimbursements being adjusted down. There is no way an insurance company will pay the same for an AI interpretation and a human interpretation.
6. There are significant unanswered medicolegal questions that will need to be addressed before AI can operate unsupervised.
In conclusion, I will work as a human radiologist until I retire in 10 years
In this video he shows an app he created using Cursor that generates G-Code for cutting fret slots into a guitar neck.
I don't know if this counts but a quick look shows: https://www.jdpower.com/cars/2025/porsche/911
Unfortunately, I have extensive first hand experience with practices that do this, and you are 100% correct.
The grift is very insidious. If you scan people over a certain age with prostate MRI, you will find suspicious lesions in a large percentage. And using fusion MRI/US guided biopsies, you will inevitable get cancer cells in the sample.
Many (most?) of these people being treated will die WITH prostate cancer, not FROM prostate cancer.
I have fielded these phone calls, lol, and would absolutely love to see ChatGPT handle this.
I would be very interested if you could provide specific examples.
4 years undergrad - major and minor not important, met the pre-med requirements 2 year grad school (got a master's degree, not required, but I was having fun) 4 years medical school 5 years radiology residency
True, and very frustrating. Imaging volume is going parabolic and we cannot keep up! I am offering full partnership on day one with no buy-in for new hires. My group is in the top 1% of radiology income. I can't find anyone to hire, I can only steal people from other groups.
I might quibble with your math a little. Most CTs have more than 100 images, in fact as you know stroke protocols have thousands. And many scans are reconstructed with different kernels, i.e. soft tissue, bone, lung. So maybe your number is a little low.
Still your point is a good one, that there is probably a finite number of imaging presentations possible. Let's pre-dictate them all! That's a lot of RVUs, where do I sign up ;-)
Now, consider this point. Two identical scans can have different "correct" interpretations.
How is that possible? To simplify things, consider an x-ray of a pediatric wrist. Is it fractured? Well, that depends. Where does it hurt? How old are they? What happened? What does the other wrist look like? Where did they grow up?
This may seems like an artificial example but I promise you it is not. There can be identical x-rays, and one is fractured and one is not.
So add this example to the training data set. Now do this for hundreds or thousands of other "corner cases". Does that head CT show acute blood, or is that just a small focus of gyriform dystrophic calcification? Etc.
I guess my point it, you may end up being right. But I don't think we are particularly close, and LLMs might not get us there.
We have some excellent ER physicians, and several who are very good at looking at their own xrays. They also have the benefit of directly examining the patient, "it hurts HERE", while I am in my basement. Several times a year they catch something I miss!
But when it comes to the hard stuff, and particularly cross-sectional imaging, they are simply not trained for it.
> Can AI read diagnostic images better than a radiologist? Almost certainly the answer is (or will be) yes.
I'm sorry, but I disagree, and I think you are making a wild assumption here. I am up to date on the latest AI products in radiology, use several of the, and none of them are even in the ballpark on this. That vast majority are non-contributory.
It is my strong belief that there is an almost infinite variation in both human anatomy and pathology. Given this variation, I believe that in order for your above assumption to be correct, the development of "AGI" will need to happen.
When I interpret a study I am not just matching patterns of pixels on the screen with my memory. I am thinking, puzzling, gathering and synthesizing new information. Every day I see something I have never seen before, and maybe no one has ever seen before. Things that can't and don't exist in a training data set.
I'm on the back end of my career now and I am financially secure. I mention that because people will assume I'm a greedy and ignorant Luddite doctor trying to protect my way of life. On the contrary, if someone developed a good replacement for what I don, I would gladly lay down my microphone and move on.
But I don't think we are there yet, in fact I don't think we're even close.