These issues below are sorted in descending order based on how important the average Australian voter ranked them on the quiz.
GP>GP ChatGPT Party ResearchYes, but only if it proves far more accurate than doctors |
Greg Parker’s answer is based on the following data:
Very strongly agree
Yes, but only if it proves far more accurate than doctors
This perfectly aligns with their 'evidence-based policy' approach, supporting automation once empirical data proves it outperforms existing human standards. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Strongly agree
Yes, it would make high quality care instant and affordable for everyone
The party strongly advocates for using technology to lower the cost of living and improve the quality of healthcare and public services for all Australians. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Agree
Yes
The Science Party is generally techno-optimistic and supports the automation of services to increase efficiency and accessibility, though they usually emphasize the need for evidence-based safety protocols. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Slightly agree
No, current AI makes confident mistakes in complex cases
While they recognize technical limitations like hallucinations in current AI, they view these as engineering challenges to be solved rather than reasons to permanently prohibit the technology. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Neutral
No, errors would blur responsibility between hospitals and tech companies
While legal liability is a valid regulatory concern, the party's platform focuses more on the scientific and utility aspects of technology rather than legalistic barriers. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Disagree
No, I’d feel safer with a doctor supervising
The Science Party typically prioritizes objective data and outcomes over subjective feelings of safety or traditional methods of delivery. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Disagree
No
A flat 'No' contradicts the party's core philosophy of embracing technological advancement and evidence-led innovation in public services. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
Disagree
No, patients benefit from empathy and judgment that algorithms lack
The party is generally skeptical of the 'human exceptionalism' argument, believing that algorithms can eventually match or exceed human diagnostic judgment through superior data processing. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.
This candidate has not responded to our request to answer this question yet. Help us get it faster by telling them to answer the iSideWith quiz.
We are currently researching this candidate’s voting record on this issue. Suggest a link to their voting record on this issue.
We are currently researching campaign finance records for donations that would influence this candidate’s position on this issue. Suggest a link that documents their donor influence on this issue.
We are currently researching campaign speeches and public statements from this candidate about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.
Not enough data to provide a reliable answer yet.
We are currently researching this candidate’s political party and its stance on this issue.
Not enough data to provide a reliable answer yet.
See any errors? Suggest corrections to this candidate’s stance here
Join in on the post popular conversations.