Theranos promoted the notion of a 'Lab On a Chip' for blood tests. It promised to quickly do multiple blood tests from a single drop of blood. It was better in every way, except for one hitch: It didn't work. Still, the idea itself is a great one. It is feasible to at least do blood testing better. According to the Washington Post, companies are still working on improvements and still raising funds: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/11/16/blood-startups-theranos/ Here is something that might be a promising research protocol and ultimately an operational lab on a chip: With a traditional testing lab, gain samples of blood classified as positive or negative based on traditional testing. Do spectral analysis of the samples and use that data for Machine Learning to train recognition of the condition based on spectral analysis. Create a 'lab on a chip' that can do a spectral analysis and match it to the condition.
Depending on how we control the roll-out of new systems everybody will live incredibly interesting, healthy, happy lives of adventure and leisure, or scary lives of misery. We should be working on the restructuring of things, so we avoid the latter scenario. Others have been skeptical that we will replace most jobs. I am sure we will replace them, and I think it will happen faster than most of us are prepared to deal with. One of my rules of thumb is that ‘things that are different are not the same’. You must be wary of conflation and false analogies/equivalencies. People are looking at the current progress with AI/ML/DL and automation as if this is not something poised to go into a positive feedback loop and change exponentially. This is something whose nature is different than things we have seen before. As someone who has watched this unfold for half a century, I am amazed at the progress we have made. The prior stabs at AI that led to AI winters were different than what is happe