usatoday24
I read Alberto Romero a few days ago in his great The Algorithmic Bridge counting Three stories who shared something disturbing: they were Three people saved by doing something as simple as asking chatgpt About his symptoms.
They did not use Prompts sophisticated or advanced techniques. They only described pain, discomfort, a concern.
And they lived to tell.
The interesting thing in the conductive thread of these three stories is not that the AI was right (although he did). Is that Natalia came up with asking Chatgpt for that tension in his jaw. It is that Cooper thought about sharing his dog’s analytics. And that Flavio, with an increasing pain, will value consulting a Chatbot In addition to a doctor.
The protagonist of these three stories It is not chatgpt, but that previous momentthat moment that someone thinks “What if …?”
We live obsessed with what the machines are taking us away. Employment, singularity, creativity. But along the way we are losing something almost equally valuable by our own foot: The ability to imagine unplanned uses, unlikely connectionsways of use that break the instruction manual.
The gap is not only between those who dominate technology and those who are not between those who can reimagine it and those who use it following established patterns.
Is Like when we buy a new oven. There are those who feel patiently to read the instruction manual memorizing each official function, and those who immediately begin to tighten buttons, turn dials and create combinations that perhaps or the manufacturer conceived.
Both will end up cooking, but it is the seconds who will discover that putting the grill A medium power while turning the fan, an impossible finish is achieved to achieve the official recipes.
True innovation has always emerged from those who consciously ignore theoretical limitations.
The good thing is that, in the same way as Talent is very democratic, This capacity does not understand credentials. A programmer senior You can get stuck by writing code with Chatgpt while a teenager discovers that asking him to simulate difficult conversations before having them. And it turns out that it works as an emotional mirror that never appeared in any manual.
The stories that Alberto collects have something more in common: they occur in the medical field, where knowledge has historically been power. Where the diagnosis flows from top to bottom. Where the informative hierarchy is so rigid that it has its own uniform.
However, there are Nature, Cooper and Flavio, investing the order, leading to the expert a diagnosis that they could not have formulated but that the AI could detect. It is not a matter of blind faith in technology (Everyone confirmed with professionals). It is something much more subversive: a silent rearrangement of who has access to what information and at what time.
While we keep wondering if the machines are going to steal our imagination, the reality is much simpler: The decisive is not what AI takes us away, but what we think about doing with it.
There is the true competitive advantage of the 21st century: in that ability to see possibilities where others only see tools with predefined instructions. Natallia, Cooper and Flavio did not save their lives for having access to superior technology, but for daring to think differently.
In Xataka | O4-mini is much more than another model of AI. It is the Tesla Model 3 of OpenAI
Outstanding image | Xataka
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings