Calling it an IDE is under-representing cursor

They have in-house models, and the data to train even more powerful ones. The cursor team is a proper AI lab.

stymaar an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> Calling it an IDE is under-representing cursor

On the contrary, it's over selling it: it's a not even a stand-alone IDE (like Zed, for instance) it's a mere fork of VSCode.

airstrike 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Isn't their in-house model just Kimi?

85% of the compute for the final model is from them, and not the base Kimi model.

	▲	airstrike 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		That just means it cost a lot. Does it perform meaningfully better than the Kimi model given all that extra compute? And proportionally to the amount spent?

tomrod 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Meh. On an outcomes analysis, I've found Cursor's delivery to be exceptionally weak.

Good luck to the alt-economy of SpaceTesla though, may all our 401ks survive.

CamperBob2 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They use Kimi and post-train it on the same stuff that anyone with a Github dump can feed it. They aren't doing anything that you can't do yourself.

	▲	redox99 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Dumping github into a model is not post training, thats pre training. And every base model already has all of github. Composer post training is clearly very good, only second to Anthropic and OpenAI. It does irk me a bit that they try to hide the fact that it's based on a chinese pretrained model though.

Their “in house models” are reportedly basically just Kimi.

	▲	frde_me 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Replied on the other comment about this, but putting it here: > See here https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 > 85% of the compute for the final model is from them, and not the base Kimi model. Of course they could be lying, but it seems feasible that they are adding a lot on top of this