SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " liability " 212 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Ex-McKinsey consultant and wellness founder: Hustle culture is a liability
Cesar Carvalho founded Wellhub, a corporate wellness platform. This is how he thinks companies should approach employee wellbeing.
Trump unveils health care affordability plan
President Trump unveiled a health care framework Thursday aimed at lowering drug prices and insurance premiums, as he seeks to address a major Republican political liability ahead of the midterm el…
WellSpan Health Announces Comprehensive Migration of Technology Portfolio to AWS
Add to FavoritesWellSpan Health, the leading health care system serving Central Pennsylvania and Northern Maryland, today announced plans for a comprehensive cloud migration of its full technology infrastructure. Together with Amazon Web Services (AWS) as its preferred cloud provider, WellSpan will transition its applications, data and environments from traditional data centers to AWS. This migration will establish the foundation for delivering next-generation, AI-enabled health care solutions that reduce administrative burden and improve outcomes for patients across the region and beyond. Supercharging Innovation, Efficiency and Patient Outcomes WellSpan's migration of systems and clinical applications, which serve 1.2 million patients across nine hospitals and 250+ facilities, is expected to be complete by April 2026, one of the fastest full-scale migrations in the health care industry. This transformation enables WellSpan to unify disparate data systems for care teams and patients alike, achieving operational efficiencies and care improvements that fragmented systems are unable to deliver. “Our comprehensive migration to the cloud accelerates our ability to deploy new clinical capabilities that transform patient care while advancing our overall innovation strategy,” said Roxanna Gapstur, Ph.D., R.N., president and CEO, WellSpan Health. “When a physician can access complete patient imaging in seconds instead of hours, we're not just modernizing technology—we're improving patient outcomes. Our new cloud infrastructure also enables us to quickly implement solutions that will free our clinicians from thousands of hours of administrative work annually so they can focus on what they do best: caring for our communities.” The transition allows WellSpan to move away from a data center-based model and enables the rapid deployment and scale of AI technology. WellSpan’s strategic partner, General Catalyst’s Health Assurance Transformation Company (HATCo), facilitated the collaboration with AWS to support the migration. WellSpan’s transformation journey benefits from HATCo’s specialized technology solutions, as well as General Catalyst and AWS’s significant partnership to improve patient outcomes, which was announced in January 2025. “Our decision to go all-in on AWS will enable insights and innovations impossible in traditional siloed environments,” said Kasey Paulus, executive vice president and chief operating officer, WellSpan Health. “This is the largest health care technology transformation in our region's history, and it positions WellSpan to be a premier partner for technology leaders across the country.” “WellSpan is building a foundation with AWS that will improve care and outcomes for patients across their health system by bringing data together into standardized formats that are optimized for AI applications,” said Dan Sheeran, vice president and general manager, Healthcare and Life Science, AWS. “To do this, it is essential to have the most secure and compliant cloud when handling patient data, along with AWS’s built-in AI governance and responsible AI frameworks that follow the industry’s highest standards to protect patient information. We look forward to continuing to work alongside WellSpan as they unlock the cloud and AI’s full potential to deliver exceptional care to their patients.” Key Benefits of the AWS Collaboration Full Portfolio Migration: WellSpan will transition its applications and data from on-premises data centers to AWS, including full IT environments and specialized applications for functions such as nursing, cardiology, pharmacy and the company’s supply chain systems. This represents approximately 7.5 petabytes of clinical and non-clinical data and more than 300 applications—the most comprehensive health system cloud migration in the Mid-Atlantic region. Approved Architectures: AWS will deliver secure, WellSpan-specific architectures tailored to each build, ensuring compliance and reliability across the health system. Unified, AI-Ready Data: Migrating to AWS enables WellSpan to harmonize data across separate systems, transforming unstructured clinical notes and multi-modal datasets into standardized, AI-ready formats. Accelerated Results and Improved Outcomes: Automated data normalization and processing will enable the deployment of applications that reduce turnaround times for items such as analyzing medical imaging or patient records from days to minutes, helping clinicians get patient results faster and improving overall health outcomes. Reduced Administrative Burden: The transition to AWS will enable swift deployment of AI-powered solutions that reclaim thousands of hours for WellSpan’s clinical and corporate teams, allowing them to focus on patient care rather than paperwork. Elastic Infrastructure: Cloud architecture will enable WellSpan to scale computing resources dynamically, supporting seasonal demand fluctuations without infrastructure investments, as well as the rapid deployment of new services across multiple locations simultaneously. Most Secure, Compliant Cloud: AWS offers the highest network availability of any cloud provider, with more than 166 HIPAA-eligible services and certifications for global compliance standards, including HITRUST CSF. Built-in AI governance and responsible AI frameworks ensure that WellSpan’s data is protected under the industry’s most rigorous standards. Tags:News releaseInnovation and partnerships
Advocates urge NJ lawmakers to protect transgender health care
New Jersey lawmakers have failed to pass a bill that would shield patients and providers from liability for gender-affirming care.
Philosophy to the Rescue of Science
The pessimistic meta-induction—the argument that since past scientific theories have been shown to be false, we should expect that today’s will turn out false, too—makes the New York Times. . Elay Shech, professor of philosophy at Auburn University, takes up the topic in the context of current political disputes about science and our government’s seemingly increasing disregard of expertise: Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of health and human services, made a version of this argument in August when defending his decision to halt hundreds of millions of dollars in mRNA vaccine development despite the objections of vaccine scientists. He said that “science is always evolving” and the experts could not always be trusted. Shech accepts that “many widely accepted [scientific] theories have been discarded” but that the question, “why should we trust the ones we have now?” is misleading. Why? It implies that the only possible attitudes toward science are naïve faith and wholesale pessimism. It assumes that science is a single global entity that rises or falls all at once, when in reality, science is an array of local domains of inquiry, each with its own standards of evidence and degrees of reliability. In place of skepticism, Shech recommends “disciplined trust.” The first step in the direction of disciplined trust is recognizing that “there is no single scientific method used in all of science.” Shech writes: Newton’s deduction from observed phenomena is very different from Darwin’s inference to the best explanation, which in turn differs radically from Einstein’s thought experiments with light beams, trains and elevators. What people call “the scientific method” is really many distinct ways of investigating the world—different strategies for representing, experimenting and classifying. Since different areas of science employ different methods and rely on different kinds of evidence, to make a case for skepticism “you need to look at the evidence and methods in a specific area of inquiry.” And that case will not be “a sweeping claim about all of science” but rather about that particular area of inquiry with, for example, what might turn out to be “well-understood methodological problems.” Shech’s piece is “Science Keeps Changing, So Why Should We Trust It?” (NYT gift link). Discussion welcome (readers are advised to keep in..
Midlands business owners raise concerns over new liquor liability law
A new law set to take effect this week aims to alleviate the financial strain on bars and restaurants in the state by allowing them to lower the $1 million liqu
Midlands business owners raise concerns over new liquor liability law
A new law set to take effect this week aims to alleviate the financial strain on bars and restaurants in the state by allowing them to lower the $1 million liqu
The disunity of science is a feature, not a bug
Mathematical models wield miraculous power, but mistaking them for reality has trapped science in a destructive quest for a “Theory of Everything.” Physicist and philosopher Ragner Fjelland argues that this leads to bloated, Frankenstein theories kept alive by clumsy, ad-hoc amendments, which reduce rather than boost science’s power. Fjelland calls for a radical shift in our attitude: we must reorientate towards creating entirely new theories, celebrating rather than lamenting disunity and diversity in science. Science, from the scientific revolution in the seventeenth century to the present day, has more or less developed in a “reductionist” way. The fundamental assumption is that all sciences may be ordered in a hierarchy that can be represented as an upside-down pyramid. At the top we find the human sciences, and at the bottom physics. Strong (or “ontological”) reductionism maintains that all theories at one level can be completely reduced to the lower level, all the way down to theories of atoms and elementary particles, or whatever is “at the bottom.” In the end, all diversity in the world can be unified in one fundamental theory. Hence it is called a final theory, or a Theory of Everything.One of the central figures in developing the idea of a Theory of Everything is the Dutch theoretical physicist Gerard 't Hooft, who received a Nobel Prize in physics in 1999 for his work. He emphasizes the non-empirical status of the theory:There exists no closely resembling alternative theory. This means that any slight change brought about in the rules would make the theory unlikely or inelegant. The theory will be a "package deal": take it, or leave it. This should hold both for the local laws and for the boundary conditions.This endeavor is not new. On the contrary, it goes all the way back to the birth of Western philosophy 2,500 years ago. The Babylonians made regular astronomical observations during a period of 600 years, from 747 BCE until 150 ACE. They developed mathematical techniques to predict astronomical phenomena, but they made no attempts at explaining them. However, the Greeks developed models, both material and theoretical, to explain the observed phenomena.The best example is Plato’s late dialogue Timaeus. Here he introduces a divine craftsman, the Demiurge, who has constructed the universe according to an original plan. Plato seems to have thought that the original plan is what is actually real, while the material world is merely an imperfect realization of it. He therefore does not, in the Timaeus, reconstruct the material universe, but the original plan, which can then be used to explain the material universe.Plato’s aim in producing a theoretical model is to reconstruct the original plan. That is what he carries out in Timaeus—and some modern physicists have embarked on the same project. For example, Einstein’s basic attitude is reflected in the title of Abraham Pais’ biography: “Subtle is the Lord...,” echoing Einstein’s comment, “Subtle is the Lord, but malicious He is not.” In an interview Einstein compared our situation to a child who enters a huge library. The child knows that someone has written the books, but he does not know the languages in which they are written. He suspects that there is a mysterious order, but he does not know what it is.___“We have all been working in what Husserl called the Galilean style; that is, we have all been making abstract mathematical models of the universe to which at least the physicists give a higher degree of reality than they accord the ordinary world of sensation.”Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize in Physics (1979)___This Platonist view is contrary to a widespread impression of science, symbolized by the picture of the “father” of modern science, Galileo Galilei, with his telescope. According to this impression, Galileo liberated himself from the dominating metaphysics of his day—basically Aristotelian philosophy—and constructed a telescope that he directed towards the sky, showing that Jupiter has four moons. He also performed experiments with bronze balls rolling down inclined planes and found the law of freely falling bodies.However, in other cases Galileo emphasized the unreliability of our senses. It is easy to see why. He defended Copernicus’ heliocentric hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, we are not at rest at the center of the universe, but moving at a tremendous speed through space. Why don’t we observe this motion? Galileo praises Copernicus because “with reason as his guide he resolutely continued to affirm what sensible experience seemed to contradict.” In other places he directly refers to Plato. SUGGESTED VIEWING The quest for a final theory With Michio Kaku Galileo’s Platonism goes back to his early writings. In The Assayer, published as early as 1623, Galileo compared the universe to a grand book that is written in the language of mathematics, and “its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometric figures without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it.” Therefore, things that cannot be described by mathematics—for example, colors, smells and odors—are not real. They are merely subjective.This division into subjective and objective, advocated by Galileo and his younger contemporary René Descartes, is normally associated with a mechanistic world view, which is regarded as the opposite of Platonism. When we reduce something to, for example, molecules and atoms, we move “downwards.” In contrast, the Platonist moves “upwards,” to abstract entities. However, it only shows that when we address fundamental questions, we should be careful in applying everyday spatial metaphors like “up” and “down.”___Nature is complex, and we cannot in general construct mathematical models that adequately describe the world.___The endeavor of finding a Theory of Everything has been heavily criticized. In 2006, the theoretical physicist Lee Smolin published “The Crisis in Fundamental Physics.” He argued that one of the most fundamental principles of science is that we should only regard theories as scientific if we have the possibility to show that they are false by experiments. Although he did not refer to Karl Popper, other critics have referred to Popper and argued that a theory is not scientific if it cannot be falsified (see for example Ellis & Silk 2014).These were not the first physicists to be anti-reductionists. In 1972, the journal Science published an article by the physicist Philip Anderson with the title “More Is Different.” This is the kind of article a scientist would normally write only after he has won a Nobel Prize. However, Anderson won the Nobel Prize for physics five years later, in 1977. The article is amazing, not primarily because it argues in favor of anti-reductionism in general, but because it argues for anti-reductionism within physics itself. Anderson’s conclusion was:At each stage entirely new laws, concepts, and generalizations are necessary, requiring inspiration and creativity to just as great a degree as in the previous one. Psychology is not applied biology, nor is biology applied chemistry.We may say that Plato started the “unity of science movement,” based on Euclidean geometry as the model of all knowledge. A distinguishing mark of geometry is that all possible constructions can be reduced to a few fundamental principles. We have to acknowledge that this approach has limitations. In general, we can easily model technological systems. In addition, we may construct simplified and idealized models that capture important aspects of systems, from various perspectives and for various purposes. But nature is complex, and we cannot in general construct mathematical models that adequately describe the world. In a complex system, each level has its distinct, emergent, properties that are characteristic of this level. Therefore, a complex system should be investigated at different levels and from different perspectives. Instead of exclusively pursuing a scientific ideal based on the unity of science, we should acknowledge the diversity—or even the disunity—of science.
ModRetro Sells Handheld Made Of The Same Metal As Attack Drones
The Anduril Chromatic device is made for ‘performance and reliability’ in case you’re playing Tetris in a warzone, I guess?
The Republicans’ Endangered Health
The refusal to extend ACA subsidies becomes a huge political liability and signals deepening splits.
Hartford: 10-Year Analysis Shows Shifts in Common, Expensive Small-Business Claims
Liability risks for small businesses have shifted over the last decade, with fire and slip-and-falls becoming more expensive while water and freezing
West Ham 0-2 Liverpool
Chris: Disappointed we didn't ask more of a nervous Liverpool team as we weren't totally outclassed. Madness from Paqueta and Bowen needs to do more as captain to shut him down. Michael: Paqueta is an absolute liability and he has cost us on more than one occasion.