I guess the hope is that combining two sub-par coding models (xAI's grok + cursor's composer) and combining the data they have access to, they can build something that can compete with OpenAI / Anthropic in the coding space...

I guess I kinda see it... it makes sense from both points of view (xAI needs data + places to run their models, cursor needs to not be reliant on Anthropic/OpenAI).

I think I don't see it working out... I just don't see an Elon company sustaining a culture that leads to a high-quality AI lab, even with the data + compute.

▲

deanc 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Have to call out that comment about grok code being sub par. I used it exclusively when it was free in Cursor and have nothing bad to say about it. And that was months ago. I imagine it’s a lot better now.

▲

dymk 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I have a lot bad to say about it. It was ass compared to OAI/Anthropic models.

It was incredibly fast though, but that just meant it was writing buggy code at breakneck speed

	▲	rich_sasha 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		> writing buggy code at breakneck speed Vibe coding in a nutshell

▲

ai_fry_ur_brain 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

plombe 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Wasn’t composer trained on Kimi? Has anyone had a chance to compare the latest Kimi model to composer?

▲

mzl 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Composer-2 is based on Kimi K2.5, but with extensive RL. Cursor estimated 3x more compute on their RL than the original K2.5 training run (some details in https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-technical-report).

Composer-2 seems very useful in Cursor, while K2.6 according to AA seems to be a really useful general model: https://artificialanalysis.ai/articles/kimi-k2-6-the-new-lea...

	▲	dmix 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		I used to hate on Composer 2 but I'm coming around to it. Opus for the big stuff and multi-file operations, Composer for all the small day-to-day IDE tasks works pretty good for me.

▲

zuzululu 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm going to be brutally honest but I have not found Kimi to be useful at all. It simply cannot compete with what closed models from Codex and Claude offers. I don't want to risk using a model outside the ecosystem and introduce variables as most of my workflow is baked into two to three large company models.

	▲	nekitamo 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That's interesting, Kimi K2.5 used through KimiCode was comparable to Sonnet in my tests, and is an excellent alternative to Anthropic models That being said, I noticed that Kimi being served through Openrouter providers was trash. Whatever they do on the backend to optimize for throughput really compromised the intelligence of the model. You have to work with Kimi directly if you want the best results, and that's also probably why they released a test suite to verify the intelligence of their new models.
	▲	iot_devs 4 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		On the other hand, I found MiniMax M2.7 a reasonable model that I could trust. I guess really depends on tastes
	▲	diordiderot 4 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Kimi is my favorite of the Chinese models. I found it much more consistent than glm or minimax
	▲	mzl 4 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Which version of Kimi and served from where?
	▲	4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]

▲

larodi 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Can s.o. please explain, does the Cursor EULA really allow it to train on my code, as I really don't expect Claude Code or CODEX to do it either?

	▲	whattheheckheck 4 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		They will because there is no way to prove they didnt
	▲	CryptoBanker 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It does unless you opt out

▲

OrangeMusic 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

But 60B for a VsCode fork?!

▲

wwnnmmppaa1Q 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]