I don't think the Cursor thing was about replacing humans entirely.

(If it was that's bad news for them as a company that sells tools to human developers!)

It was about scaling coding agents up to much larger projects by coordinating and running them in parallel. They chose a web browser for that not because they wanted to build a web browser, but because it seemed like the ideal example of a well specified but enormous (million line+) project which multiple parallel agents could take on where a single agent wouldn't be able to make progress.

embedding-shape's project here disproves that last bit - that you need parallel agents to build a competent web renderer - by achieving a more impressive result with just one Codex agent in a few days.

> I don't think the Cursor thing was about replacing humans entirely.

I think how I saw things was that somehow Cursor was/is still targetted very heavily on vibe coding in a similar fashion of bolt.dev or lovable and I even saw some vibe coders youtube try to see the difference and honestly at the end Cursor had a preferable pricing than the other two and that's how I felt Cursor was.

Of course Cursor's for the more techie person as well but I feel as if they would shift more and more towards Claude Code or similar which are subsidized by the provider (Anthropic) itself, something not possible for Cursor to do unless burning big B's which it already has done.

So Cursor's growth was definitely towards the more vibe coders side.

Now coming to my main point which is that I had the feeling that what cursor was trying to achieve wasn't trying to replace humans entirely but replace humans from the loop Aka Vibe coding. Instead of having engineers, if suppose the Cursor experiment was sucessful, the idea (which people felt when it was first released instantly) was that the engineering itself would've been dead & instead the jobs would've turned into management from a bird's eye view (not managing agent's individually or being aware of what they did or being in any capacity within the loop)

I feel like this might've been the reason they were willing to burn 5 million$ for.

If you could've been able to convince engineers considering browsers are taken as the holy grail of hardness that they are better off being managers, then a vibe coding product like Cursor would be really lucrative.

Atleast that's my understanding, I can be wrong I usually am and I don't have anything against Cursor. (I actually used to use Cursor earlier)

But the embedding shapes project shows that engineering is very much still alive and beneficial net. He produced a better result with very minimal costs than 5 million$ inference costs project.

> embedding-shape's project here disproves that last bit - that you need parallel agents to build a competent web renderer - by achieving a more impressive result with just one Codex agent in a few days.

Simon, I think that browsers got the idea of this autonomous agents partially because of your really famous post about how independent tests can lead to easier ports via agents. Browsers have a lot of independent tests.

So Simon, perhaps I may have over-generalized but do you know of any ideas where the idea of parallel agents is actually good now that browsers are off, personally after this project, I can't really think of any. When the Cursor thing first launched or when I first heard of it recently, I thought that browsers did make sense for some reason but now that its out of the window, I am not sure if there are any other projects where massively parallel agents might be even net positive over 1 human + 1 agent as Emsh.