You may have seen that last week the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) gave approval for two companies to operate self-driving taxicabs (“robotaxis”) in San Francisco, available 24/7 and able to charge fares. Think Uber or Lyft but without drivers.
Meet the future. Credit: Waymo LLC |
It has seemed inevitable for several years now, yet we’re not really ready. It reminds me, of course, of how the future is coming fast for healthcare too, especially around artificial intelligence, and we’re not really ready for that either.
The two companies, Cruise (owned by GM) and Waymo (owned
by Alphabet) have been testing the service for some time, under certain
restrictions, and this approval loosens (but does not completely remove) the
restrictions. The approval was not without controversy; indeed, the San Francisco
police and fire departments, among
others, opposed it. "They are failing to regulate a dangerous, nascent
industry," said
Justin Kloczko, a tech and privacy advocate for consumer protection non-profit
Consumer Watchdog.
The companies brag about their record of no fatalities,
but the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency has collected almost 600 “incidents”
involving autonomous vehicles, even with what they believe is very incomplete
reporting. “While we do not yet have the
data to judge AVs against the standard human drivers are setting,” CPUC
Commissioner John Reynolds admitted,
“I do believe in the potential of this technology to increase safety on the
roadway.”
Credit: Cruise LLC |
One of the most thoughtful discussions I’ve on the topic is from David Zipper in The Atlantic. He posits:
A century ago, the U.S. began rearranging its cities to accommodate the most futuristic vehicles of the era, privately owned automobiles—making decisions that have undermined urban life ever since. Robotaxis could prove equally transformative, which makes proceeding with caution all the more necessary.
A century ago, cities didn’t really have
speed limits, vehicle-only streets, parking spaces/lots/garages, and certainly
not freeways cutting through city neighborhoods. He notes: “More than half of the land in many downtowns is used to move and store
motor vehicles, occupying space that could otherwise accommodate housing,
retail, playgrounds, and parks.”
Mr. Zimmer warns that wider use of autonomous
vehicles could lead to more miles driven, and much less public transit used. He cites a 2018
quote from Frank Chen, of Andreessen Horowitz: “We don’t understand the economics of
self-driving cars because we haven’t experienced them yet. Let’s see how it
plays out.” But waiting to see
how the future plays out often means not really planning for it.
If we were certain that in, say, 10-15
years, most vehicles would be autonomous, or at least could communicate/coordinate
with each other, we’d be making different investments in things like smart
roads, speed
enforcement cameras, traffic police, or – you guessed it -- parking. Some of those investments take years to bring
about, so we’d better lay out bets down soon if we want to be ready. We can’t
even seem to get our heads around a future with largely electric vehicles (EVs)
– e.g., where are all the charging stations? – so preparing for autonomous vehicles
seems like a future we’re not thinking enough about.
Which leads me to healthcare.
For example, one of my pet peeves about the
discussions of using AI in healthcare are the ones about how they’ll help with “paperwork.” AI will take care of physician notes! AI will handle all the prior authorization
requests! AI will help fill out all
those patient forms! All of those, and
many more, certainly reflect 2023 pain points in healthcare, but they’re
missing the future. AI should not do
the paperwork, hiding it from us; it should help us eliminate the need
for it. Don’t use AI to make the system
work faster, use AI to make the system more efficient and effective.
Don't do this. Credit: Bing |
Buildings are healthcare’s version of cities’
parking lots. We require a lot of them,
be they hospitals, medical office buildings, or others, because patients usually
have to be in such places to get care. They’re also like parking because much
of what patients do in them is wait.
The future healthcare system is going to
be much more distributed. Care will shift from being given in a place where
health care professionals are to where you and your devices are, with those
devices omnipresent, connected, and smart.
They will sometimes but not always interact with human clinicians. So which buildings go, when?
Healthcare will also be much more
proactive and predictive. Impressed with what your Apple Watch can
monitor? That’s nothing compared to the monitoring we’ll
have available in the near future, including those long-predicted
nanobots swimming around in us. We’ll know how we’re doing, we’ll know how
we’re trending, and in many cases we’ll know well in advance when it is time to
take action.
AI will also help us make better predictions
about which people are going to need expensive care, when, which will have
dramatic impacts on how health insurance works and when it is actually needed. Plan for that future.
My last warning, which I’ve touched
on before, is how AI impacts payment.
Right now some argue we should treat AI as medical devices, regulating
and paying along the same lines. Others want
more CPT codes for AI, building on our existing mess of that system. Neither of those are anticipating the future;
they’re trying to lock in the present.
You're pricing AI wrong. Credit: Bing |
We’re not ready for self-driving cars, or for AI in
healthcare, which is understandable given that both have a long way to go. But the future comes at us fast, so if we’re
not preparing now we’ll be too late.
No comments:
Post a Comment