Live data from Hacker News

Big data is dead

motherduck.com

151–160 of 444 posts

Re: Big data is dead

#151
big data isn't big anymore.

1) 10 years ago, having access to 300tb of data that could sustain 10gigabytes/s of throughput would require something like two racks of disks with some SSD cache and junk.

2) people thought hadoop was a good idea

3) People assumed that everything could be solved with map:reduce

3) machine learning was much less of a thing.

4) people realised that postgres does virtually everything that mongo claimed it could.

5) people realised that cassandra was a very expensive way to make a write only database.

I gave a talk about using big data, and basically at the time the best definition I could come up with was "anything that's too big to reasonably fit in one computer. so think 4, 60 disk direct attached SAS boxes".

Most of the time people were chasing the stuff for the CV, rather than actually stopping to think if it was a good idea. (think k8s two years ago, chatGPT now, chat bots in 2020). Most buisnesses just wanted metrics, and instead of building metrics into the app, they decided to boil the ocean by parsing unstructured logs.

Not surprisingly it turned to shit pretty quick. Nowadays people are much better at building metrics generation directly into apps, so its much easier to easily plot and correlate stuff.

Re: Big data is dead

#152
post #36

"For more than a decade now, the fact that people have a hard time gaining actionable insights from their data has been blamed on its size." The real issue is that business people usually ignore what the data says. Wading through data takes a huge amount of thought, which is in short supply. Data Scientists are commonly disregarded by VPs in large corporations, despite the claims about being "data driven". Most corpo…

I used to joke that Data Scientists exist not to uncover insights or provide analysis, but merely to provide factoids that confirm senior management's prior beliefs. I did several experiments, and noticed that whenever I produced analysis that was in line with what management expected - my analysis was praised and widely disseminated. Nobody would even question data completeness, quality, whatever. They would pick so…

> Data Scientist's job is to launder management's intuition using quantitative methods :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAichhoZrKs

Re: Big data is dead

#153
Big Data was whatever someone couldn't handle in a spreadsheet or on their laptop using R.

This paper is 8 years old and it was somewhat obvious then.

Scalability! But at what COST? https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/hotos15/hotos...

A big single machine can handle 98% of peoples data reduction needs. This has always been true. Just because your laptop only has 16GB doesn't mean you need a Hadoop (or Spark, or Snowflake) cluster.

And it was always in the best interest of the BD vendors and Cloud vendors to say, "collect it all" and analyze on/or using our platform.

The future of data analysis is doing it at the point of use and incorporating it into your system directly. Your actionable insights should be ON your grafana dashboard seconds after the event occurred.

Re: Big data is dead

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ChatGPT is literally changing how school will test their students, for a start. Here's a novel idea: test students using pen and paper?

Teachers assign better scores to papers with better penmanship. I forget how strong the effect was, but using a keyboard does help equalize some biases.

Why equalize that bias?

Re: Big data is dead

#155
Sampling has proven extremely useful. Pi can be approximated with it as were nuclear bombs designed using statistical methods. Flame graphs based on stack samples are used to optimize servers. Government does planning with it. Management does its thing by wandering around.

It usually does not take many data points for an actionable insight and most actions then will invalidate small details in old data anyhow. Better to start every round with fresh eyes.

Re: Big data is dead

#156

Perhaps this is true for business data (though I'm skeptical of the claims), but, for example, for security data, this isn't true at all. Collecting cloud, identity, SaaS, and network logs/data can easily exceed hundreds of terabytes. A big reason why we're building Matano as a data lake for security. It seems an odd pitch in general to say, hey my product specifically performs poorly on large datasets.

Sounds like you're in the "Big Data One-Percenter" category described at the very bottom of the article.

Re: Big data is dead

#157
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how long until training today’s ChatGPT will cost $1000 of AWS compute. 10 years? At that point, does it keep scaling or is there an S curve where 100x more data and compute only leads to a 2x improvement?

We would need to see incredible advances in energy efficiency for that to happen.

We are! Don't even have to reach for fusion potentially being commercial technology to show it. Solar is already approaching $0.03/kilowatt hour and likely to be half of that by the end of the decade. Energy getting very cheap coupled with computing capacity continuing to go way up is going to enable lots of interesting new technologies beyond LLMs

Re: Big data is dead

#158
People don't want to deal with having to rearchitect when their workload does not fit on a single instance. Yes, optimize for the small data case, but if you build a product that can handle only the small data case, you have a tough sell.

Re: Big data is dead

#159

"For more than a decade now, the fact that people have a hard time gaining actionable insights from their data has been blamed on its size." The real issue is that business people usually ignore what the data says. Wading through data takes a huge amount of thought, which is in short supply. Data Scientists are commonly disregarded by VPs in large corporations, despite the claims about being "data driven". Most corpo…

I don't want you to tell me what the data says, I want to tell you what the data says and you go find data that confirms it.

kthnxbye

Re: Big data is dead

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably the "order" you mention is a primary key to another table, likely one that references the individual items that make up that order, so the data will be much larger than you estimate. It will grow larger still if you include web logs from your e-commerce site and event data from your mobile app so that you can correlate these orders with items that customers considered but ultimately didn't buy. How will yo…

There are functionally less than 1000 organizations that currently require distributed compute for data analysis. You can get off the shelf AWS units with 1000 cores, terabytes of ram and storage, etc. The cost of compute has decreased faster than the amount of data we have to store and process. What we used to do with spark jobs we can do with python on a single box.

This is not true. Any column store database (bigquery, Redshift, snowflake) implements distributed compute behind the scenes. When an analyst/business intelligence people have a query return in 3 seconds instead of 15 seconds, it's actually huge. Not just in aggregate amount of time saved, but in creating a quick feedback loop in testing hypothesizes. This is especially true considering that most analyst type people look at data as aggregates across some dimension (e.g. sales per month , unique visitors per region, etc...)

These types of questions are orders of magnitude faster with a distributed backend.

Post reply on HN