| ▲ | mohsen1 5 hours ago |
| Cursor Composer 1 was Qwen and this is Kimi. IDE is based on VSCode. The entire company is build on packaging open source and reselling it. Ollama is also doing this. There is so much money to be made repackaging open source these days. So funny to see Twitter go wild saying "a 50 person team just beat Anthropic" blah blah. |
|
| ▲ | miroljub 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > Cursor Composer 1 was Qwen and this is Kimi. IDE is based on VSCode. The entire company is build on packaging open source and reselling it. The question is, where's the outrage? Why are there no headlines "USA steals Chinese tech?" "All USA can do is make a cheap copy of Chinese SOTA models". > So funny to see Twitter go wild saying "a 50 person team just beat Anthropic" blah blah. Well, if it's an American company, then it's a noble underdog story. When Chinese do it, they are thieves leeching on the US tech investment. It's all so predictable, even the comments here. |
| |
| ▲ | chzblck 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | because its open source. | | |
| ▲ | miroljub an hour ago | parent [-] | | A license doesn't matter if the perpetrator doesn't comply with it. |
| |
| ▲ | Tostino an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I mean, I (and a ton of others) were pretty outspoken about ollama being a pack of grifters. The thing they are good at is marketing though, so it drowns out other projects in the area. |
|
|
| ▲ | NitpickLawyer 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > packaging open source and reselling it. It's a bit more than that. They have plenty of data to inform any finetunes they make. I don't know how much of a moat it will turn out to be in practice, but it's something. There's a reason every big provider made their own coding harness. |
| |
| ▲ | pbowyer 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Can anyone enlighten me how having a coding harness when for most customers you say "we won't train on your code" helps you do RL? What's the data that they rely on? Is it the prompts and their responses? | | |
| ▲ | josho an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | The meta data is useful. Eg, When a prompt had a bad result and was edited, or had lots of back and forth to correct tool usage that information can be distilled and used to improve models. And now imagine if you are focused on this for weeks you can likely come up with other ideas to leverage the metadata to improve model performance. | |
| ▲ | rubymamis 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I guess they rely on many people not toggling privacy-mode on? | |
| ▲ | __mharrison__ 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Does "code" include the prompt? Seems like the prompts would be the goldmines. Hook those up to rl an open weight model... | |
| ▲ | victorbjorklund 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I doubt the majority does that. I bet the majority is using the defaults. | |
| ▲ | doctorpangloss 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It doesn't matter what your privacy setting is, with any savvy vendor. Your data is used to train by paraphrasing it, and the paraphrasing makes it impossible to prove it was your data (it is stored at rest paraphrased). Of course the paraphrasing stores all the salient information, like your goals and guidance to the bot to the answer, even if it has no PII. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | dmix 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Cursor’s integration is much deeper than just plugging an LLM into VSCode That said I have a feeling both VSCode and Claude code will catch up to their integration. But neither comes close yet (I say that as someone who mainly uses Claude Code). |
| |
| ▲ | bearjaws 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | As a command line junkie, what is the main thing Claude Code needs to catch up with cursor? I haven't dove into using a LLM in my editor, so I am less familiar with workflows there. | | |
| ▲ | lubujackson an hour ago | parent [-] | | I use both pretty heavily. Cursor has an "Ask" mode that is useful when I don't want it to touch files or ask a non-sequitur. Claude may have an easy way to do this, but I haven't seeked it. Cursor also has an interesting Debug mode that actively adds specific debug logging logic to your code, runs through several hypotheses in a loop to narrow down the cause, then cleans up the logging. It can be super useful. Finally, when making peecise changes I can select a function, hit cmd-L and add certain ljnes of code to the context. Hard to do that in Claude. Cursor tends to be much faster for quicker, more precise work in general, and rarely goes "searching through the codebase" for things. Most importantly, I'm cheap. a
If I leave Cursor on Auto I can use it full time, 8 hours a day, and never go past the $20 monthly charge. Yes, it is probably just using free models but they are quite decent now, quick and great for inline work. | | |
| ▲ | nsingh2 13 minutes ago | parent [-] | | The majority of Ask/Debug mode can be reproduced using skills. For copying code references, if you're using VS Code, you can look at plugins like [1], or even make your own. Cursor's auto mode is flaky because you don't know which model they're routing you to, and it could be a smaller, worse model. It's hard to see why paying a middleman for access to models would be cheaper than going directly to the model providers. I was a heavy Cursor user, and I've completely switched to Codex CLI or Claude Code. I don't have to deal with an older, potentially buggier version of VS Code, and I also have the option of not using VS Code at all. One nice thing about Cursor is its code and documentation embedding. I don't know how much code embedding really helps, but documentation embedding is useful. [1] https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=ezforo.c... |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | PUSH_AX an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > There is so much money to be made repackaging open source these days These days? Almost every tech offering in existence is 1000+ OSS dependencies gaffer taped together with a sprinkling of business logic. Cursor isn't a shocking bit of software to pay for, its investment however... |
|
| ▲ | rubymamis 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Do you know what Qwen model Composer 1.5 used? |
|
| ▲ | rvz 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > Cursor Composer 1 was Qwen... We know Composer 2 is Kimi K2.5 from that tweet. Where is the evidence for Composer 1 being based on Qwen? > So funny to see Twitter go wild saying "a 50 person team just beat Anthropic" blah blah. In this case, it will be the other way round: Anthropic will see Cursor as a competitor AI lab using open weight models for Composor 2 (actually Kimi K2.5) which was allegedly distilled from Opus 4.6, and would be enough for Anthropic to cut off Cursor from using any of models. That's where it is going. |
