←back to thread

Getting AI to write good SQL

(cloud.google.com)
501 points richards | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
mykowebhn ◴[] No.44013449[source]
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 brought new found wealth to more people, but it may have also diluted the quality of the talent pool. That said, I think it was mostly good.

Now with this game-changing efficiency from these AI tools, I'm sure we've seen an end to the glory days in terms of salaries for the SW profession.

With this gone, where else could relatively normal people achieve financial independence? Definitely not in the service industry.

Very sad.

replies(9): >>44013459 #>>44013488 #>>44013509 #>>44013550 #>>44013653 #>>44014967 #>>44015156 #>>44015674 #>>44015983 #
hiAndrewQuinn ◴[] No.44014967[source]
It's better for society to get much wealthier, much faster, by opening up the possibility for anyone to do advanced programming, than for a small class of anointed and studied elites to get rich via this exclusion. It's the opposite of sad. It's the best thing that ever happened for the productive use of a computer by a layperson since the invention of the search engine.
replies(2): >>44015080 #>>44015390 #
eqvinox ◴[] No.44015080[source]
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 issue not helped by LLMs writing SQL?)

replies(1): >>44015354 #
hiAndrewQuinn ◴[] No.44015354[source]
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 more people are able to use computers for more advanced things. Just because that wealth doesn't directly appear as zeros in your financial statements doesn't mean the wealth hasn't been created.

replies(1): >>44015540 #
eqvinox ◴[] No.44015540{3}[source]
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?

replies(1): >>44026866 #
1. hiAndrewQuinn ◴[] No.44026866{4}[source]
Electricity in the US currently hovers around 20 cents per kWh; 1 kWh gets you somewhere on the order of 1000 ChatGPT queries. So that's about 0.02 cents per query.

At the current US federal minimum wage of $7.25, that means you would need to work for about 0.1 seconds to afford the electricity bill for one query. Maybe 1 full second for one of the really hard ones.

So my serious answer to your question is, I'm pretty sure these disenfranchised groups can find room in their budget for a query or two if they think it's worth doing. In fact, they might even find ways to save more than 1 second by using that query, in which case they can produce more economic value... And so society gets richer.

replies(1): >>44028725 #
2. eqvinox ◴[] No.44028725[source]
I apologize for being excessively metaphorical and using "the electricity bill" to refer to the overall cost of using AI.

That said, it should be clear to you that any future pricing of AI services after the currently ongoing honeymoon period will need to recover the initial investments that have happened in the past years, pay for silicon, and make some profit too.

replies(1): >>44048400 #
3. hiAndrewQuinn ◴[] No.44048400[source]
Actually, no, that's not clear to me either. While profit is certainly always what private enterprises aim for, it's also possible they will simply fail at it. Companies go bankrupt all the time. Those investments might simply be lost as other, better, cheaper options become available.

Nowhere should give us more confidence in this outcome being not just possible but likely, over the next 5-10 years, than the rapid growth of locally runnable models. There the fixed cost really is market rate silicon and the ongoing variable costs simply market rate electricity. So I don't even think you were being excessively metaphorical with that. That is actually where the price will head.