Live data from Hacker News

Goodbye, data science

ryxcommar.com

71–80 of 415 posts

Re: Goodbye, data science

#71
I made this same transition from data science to data engineering about 18 months ago and I've never looked back.

I hated working with bad code and dealing with arrogant phds who don't value good code. I've seen so many terrible Jupyter Notebooks just copied and pasted into VS Code and the data scientist just washed their hands of it calling it "production ready." Here's a conversation I've had multiple times:

Me: have you ever considered not making every variable global scope

Them: that's just software engineering. We do machine learning

Me: if it's just software engineering, then why can't you do it?

Meanwhile, automated data science tools are getting halfway decent. If you know what algorithm to pick and you don't need to run millions of records through the model every minute, your standard business analyst could probably get a solid model going--at least as well as most data scientists for all the reasons the article mentions.

And I like that I know I can do data engineering. With data science you can never really know if you can hit your target metrics given the data you have. So data scientists end up encouraged to fudge their results or make sloppy decisions. With data engineering I can say "yes this is doable or no that's not" and people believe me.

My prediction: there's value in the massive volume of data but most of it can be had through standard dashboards, some summary statistics, a graph network, or maybe a linear/logistic regression. Most data science is BS and companies aren't getting the return they need to pay for these guys. (And good God, you almost certainly don't need a neural network.) Meanwhile, data engineering will get integrated into software development, and machine learning—by virtue of its proliferation through academia—will just become another tool for software developers. Data scientists won't get laid off enmass but they will go the way of the webmaster: either pick up new skills and evolve or move on til they end up with new titles

Re: Goodbye, data science

#72
In a recent past life, I was a HPC (high performance computing) administrator for a mid size company (just barely S&P400) who was in the transportation industry, so I had a lot of interactions with the "data science" team and it was just a fascinating delusion to watch.

Our CTO did the "Quick, this is the future! I'll be fired if I don't hop on this trend" panic thing and picked up a handful of recent grads and gave them an obscene budget by our company's standard.

The main problem they were expected to solve - forecasting future sales - was functionally equivalent to "predict the next 20 years of ~25% of the world economy". Somehow these 4 guys with a handful of GPUs were expected to out-predict the entirety of the financial sector.

The amazing part was they knew it was crap. All of their stakeholders knew it was crap. Everyone else who heard about it knew it was crap. But our CTO kept paying them a fortune and giving them more hardware every year with almost no expectation of results or performance. It was a common joke (behind the scenes) that if they actually got it right, we'd shut down our original business and becomes the world's largest bank overnight.

At least it finally gave the physics modelers access to some decent GPUs which led to some breakthrough products, as they finally were able to sneak onto some modern hardware.

Re: Goodbye, data science

#73

// it was often personally unfulfilling (e.g. tuning a parameter to make the business extra money). He lost me here. Something I've always loved about being an engineer (and now in product) is that something small we do/tweak can have big impact. If you tuned a parameter and that actually had tangible impact on the business, that's like the best case scenario and should be celebrated (vs doing some cool rocket scienc…

If I work my ass off and my model recommends a few extra units, I don't see another dime, so where's the motivation?

Re: Goodbye, data science

#74
i am just reading this and thinking "but why?"...

there are different flavors of DS, there are people who are doing diffusion models, doing top stuff that may or may not yield anything, but they are doing it because they know math well and enough code to put new maths stuff into new products. deep knowledge. so called ML engineers. maybe they are even good at coding at the lowest level, but in their point of view, why? these people are at huge companies that have vast resources downstream, they make people like OP work their work actually..

there is T shaped folks (unicorns, everybody wants one even if politically not ready [most arent]), where they know some concepts of many topics, perhaps so called full stack DS, which i consider myself to be... and i wouldn't be able to read thru most scientific papers, but I can put stuff together from start to finish including deploying it as an API that's scalable to top performance because of cloud. i do go back to basics often and I think its only natural! i think its like being a pilot, why not check the basics that actually, if forgotten, will take everything down lol... and you will use that the most as well!

i think also many people who are too much into one thing, math, code, whatever it is, start to call non basic things that are basic to them, well --- basic... BUT THERE IS NOTHING BASIC about multi linear reg and how to set it up all proper and how humanity spent thousands of years getting to this point..

there is also DS thats like data analyst on steroids, knowing middle basic and middle tier algos and stats well and can deliver mad value with a bit of business knowledge. hell, they could even use excel for their stuff, but proper understanding of the question at hand will most likely allow you to downgrade to lower, simpler tools. and simple is awesome! people often misinterpret complicated for advanced, not the case whatsoever.

once you know the land you accept your weak points and strong points and points you need to know enough to put stuff together. at the end if you know how to make sure stuff works and it works, hey, it works. and the only thing at that point between messing around and science, is "writing it down"... ;) push that code up , make it reproducible end to end.

Re: Goodbye, data science

#75
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Validated engineering cost savings should be treated like sales, the engineer gets a percentage. If you want to really follow the same compensation structure, we would then give engineers a really low base salary and make 80% of their compensation performance dependent. Be careful what you wish for :) Besides - this would drive some strange incentive structures. If you incentivise people based on cloud savings for…

Oh yeah also the pressure on a continuous basis where your value is only ever your last 3 mo average

Yep :) Big performance related bonuses sound great until you realise it also means you are heavily performance managed and most of your livelihood depends on your pipeline and actually closing sales. You are constantly looking off a cliff.

Maybe you are on $150k per year today, but in three months time you are back to $45k per year because you didn’t make some minimum sales threshold. Might be fine for some people, but depending on your mortgage…

Re: Goodbye, data science

#76
post #29
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

would you highlight some of the biggest differences between ML engineering and data engineering? I believe they're sometimes used interchangebly especially if "data" is "datasets" for ML.

Data Engineer = build the data pipelines; ML Engineer = implement the models

Not sure why this is confusing, sounds like people think they are the same because they have never worked in the area. It's always been very well defined at Corps I've been at.

Re: Goodbye, data science

#77

Unfortunately it seemed pretty clear from the start that this is what data science would turn into. Data science effectively rebranded statistics but removed the requirement of deep statistical knowledge to allow people to get by with a cursory understanding of how to get some python library to spit out a result. For research and analysis data scientists must have a strong understanding of underlying statistical theo…

On the flip side you used to have statisticians writing code that is frankly unusable in a Production environment. You would weep at the R code I've seen and had to turn into something to actually produce business value.

Yeah but in the end it’s just code. And even better, just R.

The business value comes from the stats guy.

Re: Goodbye, data science

#78

Unfortunately it seemed pretty clear from the start that this is what data science would turn into. Data science effectively rebranded statistics but removed the requirement of deep statistical knowledge to allow people to get by with a cursory understanding of how to get some python library to spit out a result. For research and analysis data scientists must have a strong understanding of underlying statistical theo…

On the flip side you used to have statisticians writing code that is frankly unusable in a Production environment. You would weep at the R code I've seen and had to turn into something to actually produce business value.

This is exactly my point. Let subject matter experts in their respective disciplines handle what they know and communicate through the lingua franca of R. Most data scientists/statisticians probably shouldn't be writing production code, I think that's ok. It's a failing of management to think that coding is coding and not understand the value of true engineering ability.

Re: Goodbye, data science

#79
post #59

I have never understood the what a good ML engineer couldn't do and a Data scientist could in _majority_ situations. When you need a decision to be made based on data its just common sense risk analysis added together with basic statistics. I feel some good field training in statistics(Look up Andrew Gelman) a couple of good courses on Linear, Bayesian Regression is all you need, rest is just engineering skill. The d…

Can you make pretty graphs in Matplotlib and sound smart in front of Executives?

Re: Goodbye, data science

#80
post #3

As someone who also wants to move away from data science, data engineering is the last thing I would want to do. I think DE comes with many of the same problems and it's also a very ill-defined career track; I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. ML engineer or backend developer seem like much more appealing job profiles.

I went data science to data engineering and been very happy. You may have trouble moving into backend development direct from data science because data scientists don't have a reputation for writing solid maintable code so data engineering could be a nice intermediate step cause it's heavy python
Post reply on HN