Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

patterns.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 311 posts

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#281

Post by kqr »

anentropic wrote: post #267
kqr wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's not a position where it is critical that all answers are 100 % accurate. Maybe getting it right every once in a while is enough to pay for the GPT compute time, but not really for analyst time.

Seems like the issue would be you'd generally get results that 'look' right but would never know if they were actually right without going through and... analysing them

I'm saying there are applications where you don't have to know! As long as the fraction incorrect is less than 50 % and you have 2:1 odds on the consequences you don't have to know which 50 % are incorrect.

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#282

Post by foobarbecue »

blowski wrote: post #258
mdcox wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no one wants to automate themselves out of a job, only other people.

We all believe our job is so challenging and has such special requirements that it _can't_ be automated. It requires someone with the kind of experience learned with wisdom over a long time. Blah blah blah.

Not all of us.

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#283

Post by kqr »

shinycode wrote: post #249
desert_rue wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which errors are you okay with?

Yeah and whose responsibility is it when not catched in time and there this consequences / damage ?

The consequences would be accounted for up front and paid out of the savings from using GPT.

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#284

Post by kqr »

moonchrome wrote: post #276
kqr wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's not a position where it is critical that all answers are 100 % accurate. Maybe getting it right every once in a while is enough to pay for the GPT compute time, but not really for analyst time.

If you're OK with garbage data you don't need ChatGPT - you can probably make up plausible data on your own. Unless you're building some lorem ipsum stuff.

I might not be okay with only garbage data, but data that are correct 60 % of the time may be good enough for some use cases, when it can be had for 1/50 of the price.

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#285

Post by yonz »

If Snowflake Cloud could bolt a working version of something like this, that would epic.

There has to be a way to do invariant training for LLMs, they are already mind boggling powerful but if these models could use language grammar files / Table schemas to learn to respond correctly it would be a game changer.

I am curious about the next codex release.

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#286

Post by foobarbecue »

Hedepig wrote: post #261
Hellmitioksldf wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats actually my strategy; This makes it so that 1. my quality overall becomes better and my bosses always liked that (doing things per hand are more error prone, not on time etc.) 2. I can go on holiday knowing my company doesn't need me desperate 3. I can spend the free time of actually innovating and bringing more value to the company/product The problem is not automating yourself out of a job but not being able…

Despite productivity generally improving over the last few decades, wage compensation has not. I'm concerned this will continue as a trend with any productivity improvements from these models.

Right. Presented with efficiency gains, firms tend to increase profit, not wages. One way to change that is to give workers more bargaining power through market shifts or unionization.

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#287

Post by guru4consulting »

antihipocrat wrote: post #213
devmor wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't seem like you've really replaced anyone with this. You spent 8 hours doing the work that you could have paid an SQL analyst to do in much less. Unless you're saying that your time is worth less than you'd pay the analyst?

I think the idea is that once built it would be a service that could parse a question, then automatically develop and run any query in response. Sounds cool until it produces the wrong results.. then you'll need to hire an analyst to check every query just in case.

If there are extensive test cases with static dataset, this may help with query modifications (optimize query, fine-tune, etc.) Of course, this may not feasible for new queries as you can't have test script until the query is ready.

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#288

Post by JohnBooty »

LeftHandPath wrote: post #97
Eji1700 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad i'm not the only one who saw this. Feels extremely overblown. Very impressive, don't get me wrong, and is yet another bridge closer to letting business side do plain text queries. But that said, stuff like this has existed for awhile, and it's certainly not replacing analysts. For a start, this assumes a VERY clean model, which is of course what you strive for, but the moment you step out of FAANG you'll find th…

Still, while it might not be useful yet , can’t it stand its own as an intriguing proof of concept? The first car was hardly ready to replace the horse. But look where we are now.

A car is mostly an amalgamation of mechanical devices and we have a solid track record of steadily and incrementally improving those over dozens of millennia.

Modern cars also have a lot of computing power in the form of fairly dumb systems that are good at sensing things and following rules e.g. "based on conditions X, Y, and Z the flow of the fuel injector nozzle should be N". Got a solid track record here too albiet one that's decades long and not millennia.

A tool that replaces a human data analyst needs to do a lot of inference. When I'm translating stakeholder requests into code and reports, it's about 10% coding and 90% human inference. Remains to be seen how good machines can get there.

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#289

Post by freejazz »

kqr wrote: post #281
anentropic wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like the issue would be you'd generally get results that 'look' right but would never know if they were actually right without going through and... analysing them

I'm saying there are applications where you don't have to know! As long as the fraction incorrect is less than 50 % and you have 2:1 odds on the consequences you don't have to know which 50 % are incorrect.

Really? Then why pay for the thing in the first place. Why keep the data and make the queries if the results don't actually matter? I'm impressed that you have the ability to envision such a possibility, perhaps you can use that ability to come up with something reasonably likely as opposed to "conceptually possible".

Re: Replacing a SQL analyst with 26 recursive GPT prompts

#290

Post by freejazz »

kqr wrote: post #284
moonchrome wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're OK with garbage data you don't need ChatGPT - you can probably make up plausible data on your own. Unless you're building some lorem ipsum stuff.

I might not be okay with only garbage data, but data that are correct 60 % of the time may be good enough for some use cases, when it can be had for 1/50 of the price.

Then posit such a scenario as opposed to just the numbers...
Post reply on HN