What the hell is this article? It has no source, it sounds like a half-baked thought and is all of 3 short paragraphs in length. This is low effort engagement bait at best.
I tried googling what the hell this might be based off of, and found this article. It appears to be a review conducted by the office of the auditor general (full report can be found here). The audit was of the process for the request for bids for the scribe system - that is to say, the ‘pre-approved’ vendors. There is nothing about whether any of this software is used, let alone how it is used.
Like yes, it’s important to be looking at this, and it’s good that the auditor is telling the government to improve its RFB process to better screen these tools, but this article is making it out like actual doctors are using this software and blatantly using it in ways that would harm the patient. That’s just not true.
Frankly speaking I should probably just remove this article entirely as its half baked at best, AI slop at worst, but I’m going to leave it up because hopefully folks will see something like this and stop reacting to a headline immediately and instead take a closer look at articles that are shared as engagement bait.
What the hell is this article? It has no source, it sounds like a half-baked thought and is all of 3 short paragraphs in length. This is low effort engagement bait at best.
I tried googling what the hell this might be based off of, and found this article. It appears to be a review conducted by the office of the auditor general (full report can be found here). The audit was of the process for the request for bids for the scribe system - that is to say, the ‘pre-approved’ vendors. There is nothing about whether any of this software is used, let alone how it is used.
Like yes, it’s important to be looking at this, and it’s good that the auditor is telling the government to improve its RFB process to better screen these tools, but this article is making it out like actual doctors are using this software and blatantly using it in ways that would harm the patient. That’s just not true.
Frankly speaking I should probably just remove this article entirely as its half baked at best, AI slop at worst, but I’m going to leave it up because hopefully folks will see something like this and stop reacting to a headline immediately and instead take a closer look at articles that are shared as engagement bait.
That audit you found is linked in the article though, at the start of the second paragraph. This is still slop, but at least it has a source I guess.
it isn’t for me, but maybe that’s my ad blocker?
EDIT: tried it in another browser, my blocker happened to block the first 3 paragraphs lol, no wonder it was so confusing…
But it’s written by the Gaming Editor. LOL
We’re cooked.