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

Getting AI to write good SQL

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 379 posts

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#311

Post by ayrtondesozzla »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #282
scuol wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, as with many of Google's services, you pay with your data. Pay-as-you-go with Gemini does not snort your data for their own purposes (allegedly...).

The cost to google lying about data privacy far exceeds the profit gained from using it. Alienate your most valuable customers (enterprise) so you can get 10% more training data? And almost certainly end up in a sea of lawsuits from them? Not happening. Investors would riot.

Indeed, the first stage of the enshittification process requires mollycoddling the customer in a convincing manner.

Looking forward to stage 2 - start serving the advertisers while placating the users, and finally stage 3 - offering it all up to the investors while playing the advertisers off each other and continuing to placate the users.

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#312

Post by ayrtondesozzla »

oplorpe wrote: post #267
wewewedxfgdf wrote: post #26

Can I just say that Google AI Studio with latest Gemini is stunningly, amazingly, game changingly impressive. It leaves Claude and ChatGPT's coding looking like they are from a different century. It's hard to believe these changes are coming in factors of weeks and months. Last month i could not believe how good Claude is. Today I'm not sure how I could continue programming without Google Gemini in my toolkit. Gemini…

I’ve yet to see any llm proselytizers acknowledge this glaring fact: Each new release is “game changing”. The implication being the last release y’all said was “game changing” is now “from a different century”. Do you see it? For this to be an accurate and true assessment means you were wrong both before and wrong now.

I'm not an LLM proselytiser but this makes no sense? It would almost make sense if someone were claiming there are only two possible games, the old one and the new one, and never any more. Who claims that?

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#313

Post by eqvinox »

hiAndrewQuinn wrote: post #307
eqvinox wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but this isn't "anyone" doing advanced programming, it's the LLM doing it. The humans get skill in using LLM, not programming, and whether this new skill will make anyone wealthy is an open question. (Also, just by market logic, rare skills in demand are always paid more; I'm not sure why you're calling it an "exclusion". The education system in a lot of places might have that function, but that's a separate is…

I contest that. A human using an LLM to program, is a human programming. Gaining skill with the LLM is gaining skill in programming. And the things most people are both able and willing to now create with LLMs are of vastly greater complexity than whatever they were doing before - so yes, it's advanced programming. I also contest your definition of wealth. Society absolutely and obviously becomes wealthier when many…

I'm happy to accept your contest, but you should be aware that both of our opinions are only beliefs at this point and science will have an answer at some point in the future when the effects of LLMs on humans are understood better.

I do have to ask though, who do you think will pay the electricity bill for disenfranchised groups lacking wealth the most strongly to use LLMs? Some things might be free right now, but what do you think will happen when some of e.g. OpenAI's $300bn valuation is being collected?

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#314

Post by squidbeak »

oplorpe wrote: post #267
wewewedxfgdf wrote: post #26

Can I just say that Google AI Studio with latest Gemini is stunningly, amazingly, game changingly impressive. It leaves Claude and ChatGPT's coding looking like they are from a different century. It's hard to believe these changes are coming in factors of weeks and months. Last month i could not believe how good Claude is. Today I'm not sure how I could continue programming without Google Gemini in my toolkit. Gemini…

I’ve yet to see any llm proselytizers acknowledge this glaring fact: Each new release is “game changing”. The implication being the last release y’all said was “game changing” is now “from a different century”. Do you see it? For this to be an accurate and true assessment means you were wrong both before and wrong now.

I'm unsure I fully understand your contention.

Are you suggesting that a rush to hyperbole which you don't like means advances in a technology aren't groundbreaking?

Or is it that if there is more than one impressive advance in a technology, any advance before the latest wasn't worthy of admiration at the time?

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#315

Post by th0ma5 »

gundmc wrote: post #276
Eezee wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried it out because of your comment and the very first prompt Gemini 2.5 Pro hallucinated a non-existant plugin including detailed usage instructions. Not really my idea of good.

Can you provide your prompt? This hasn't matched my experience. You can also try enabling search grounding in the right hand bar. You have to also explicitly tell it in your prompt to use grounding with Google Search, but I've had very good success with that even for recent or niche plugins/libraries.

So glad we're pinning the success and learning of new technology on random anecdotes. Do pro AI people not see how untenable it is where everything is a rumor?

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#316

Post by roflyear »

tonyhart7 wrote: post #124
thingsilearned wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

companion or replacement?

they would replace entire software department until AI make bug because endless changes into your javascript framework then they would hire human again to make fix we literally creating solution for our own problem

Or, just let their users deal with the bugs b/c churn will be less than the cost of developers.

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#317

Post by th0ma5 »

levocardia wrote: post #91

In one of Stephen Boyd's lectures on convex optimization, he has some quip like "if your optimization problem is computationally intractable, you could try really hard to improve the algorithm, or you could just go on vacation for a few weeks and by the time you get back, computers will be fast enough to solve it." I feel like that's actually true now with LLMs -- if some query I write doesn't get one-shotted, I don'…

Except here the core functionality changes day to day and hinges on specific word usage.

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#318

Post by squidbeak »

jgalt212 wrote: post #244

For me the flash model is way better than the pro model. I don't want to wait all the extra time to get some code back that I'm going to have to read and modify anyway. I much prefer getting a 92.5% right answer now, than 95% correct answer a minute or minutes from now.

Are those percentages real, or plucked out of the air? I find Pro's quality starkly higher

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#319

Post by a_imho »

mykowebhn wrote: post #199

I understand from a technical POV how this could be considered great news. But I don't see how this is good news at all from a societal POV. The last 15 or so years has seen an unprecedented rise in salaries for engineers, especially software engineers. This has brought an interest in the profession from people who would normally not have considered SW as a profession. I think this is both good and bad. It has brough…

I've not fully bought the hype yet but actually think LLMs democratizing technical solutions would be a fantastic opportunity for both established players and newcomers. The more LLMs improve, the less of a moat technology is in itself.

Re: Getting AI to write good SQL

#320

Post by oplorpe »

ayrtondesozzla wrote: post #312
oplorpe wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve yet to see any llm proselytizers acknowledge this glaring fact: Each new release is “game changing”. The implication being the last release y’all said was “game changing” is now “from a different century”. Do you see it? For this to be an accurate and true assessment means you were wrong both before and wrong now.

I'm not an LLM proselytiser but this makes no sense? It would almost make sense if someone were claiming there are only two possible games, the old one and the new one, and never any more. Who claims that?

I suppose my point is along these lines.

When gpt3 was trained, its parent company refused to release the weights claiming it was a “clear and present danger to civilization”. Now GPT3 is considered a discardable toy.

So either these things are going toward an inflection point of usefulness or this release too will be, in time, mocked as a discardable toy too.

So why every 3 days do we get massive threads with people fawning over the new fashion like this singular technology that is developing is ackshually finally become the fire stolen from the gods.

Post reply on HN