upvote
> largely not doing much outside of 'grok is this true'

Hey now, don't forget about it's super important other use, taking innocent photos of people and regenerating them in less clothing and compromising positions.

I'm sad that I even know that.

reply
They changed that recently, you need to be paying €10/mo for that now. The free plan and/or access for the basic Twitter plan are gone.
reply
That doesn't make it better! It did somehow slow down the regulatory response because politicians are dumb, though.
reply
It means X can identify users at least, so they are probably quite a bit less likely to do that.
reply
You’ve obviously never attempted to complete a purchase while working under a regulatory body, required to test the theory.
reply
What difference does that make?
reply
Security through enshittification. Nice.
reply
deleted
reply
deleted
reply
I wouldn't be surprised if those enterprise relationships evaporate after this acquisition. There's a reason why xAI has zero enterprise customers.
reply
> There's a reason why xAI has zero enterprise customers

I’m curious where you pull these stats from

reply
I've had hundreds of AI-powered vendor tools come across my desk as part of my job, and I have yet to see a single one that uses Grok. I'm also not aware of any publicly announced customers for Grok's enterprise offering. The Grok Enterprise website doesn't list any customers.
reply
[flagged]
reply
For Enterprises it's way easier to delist Cursor from the list of used tools than to have a relation with someone known publicly for neofascist aspirations.

xAI is not, and was not that bad, it's just everybody ignores it for anything serious due to obvious reasons.

reply
You've literally got tools like opencode that are MIT licensed. Most of those points X could do on their own or are things that make this attractive for cursor not X.

e.g. Need developer data? Use some of that spare GPU compute, hand out free top end model coding access for a bit and you'll very rapidly have developer data

>decent enterprise relationships

I guess. 60B worth of "relationships" though?

reply
> hand out free top end model coding access for a bit and you'll very rapidly have developer data

They tried this - grok was free on openrouter for a while

reply
Marketing push was there too, everyone was saying Grok had jumped Claude and Codex, yet I never got that when using all 3.
reply
Turns out that benchmaxxing doesn't help if it's not very good when people actually try it.
reply
It's more useful to have access your full code base compared to having access to only your input and the output they generate.
reply
But imagine if they handed out free access to Kimi or GLM-5. Actually, I still wouldn't use it, because I avoid APIs that say they hold on to data.
reply
And presumably they got data from it...
reply
and then released a model that didn't really leave a mark with code performance
reply
But if the developers are to presumably use the model you give out, what data are you going to get from them thats useful?
reply
I don't know - was GP speculating that there is value there on a scale to justify 60B no me
reply
Yes I think you're right. Reinforcement learning is extremely compute heavy, which cursor doesn't have. And X.ai doesn't have the coding agent data anthropic/OpenAI has, but does have the compute.

However, one thing in AI is that while the usage goes up extremely quickly, it tends to go down just as fast. I know a lot of companies that are in the process of switching from Cursor to Claude Code, so in 6-12 months I'm not entirely sure of the data quality/quantity.

Also I think it is telling that they are calling them SpaceX not X. The X brand is absolutely toxic, especially in enterprise.

reply
> Also I think it is telling that they are calling them SpaceX not X. The X brand is absolutely toxic, especially in enterprise.

it might not help all that much once it turns into "grok" harness or otherwise associated with elon

reply
I think you're right. Other providers can offer coding subscriptions that use in-house models, and this sets the stage for a Grok coding plan that's built in to Cursor.

$60 billion seems expensive, but it gives them a much better chance at competing in the market than if they started their own harness from scratch.

reply
Absolutely no enterprise - I work in enterprise cloud consulting - absolutely no company would trust Grok with their IP compared to Anthropic or OpenAI with Musk’s reputation on how he runs his businesses.

Anthropic just tolerates the money losing developers who pay $20/$200 for subscriptions.

reply
Maybe the play here is a way to sneak sneak Grok into enterprise by calling it Cursor. Or they'll just give up on it and run Cursor's fine-tuned Kimi on Colossus.
reply
They'll sign a contract, and the contract will be very clear about whether using user prompts as training data is allowed or not. They're not going to care much about reputation; they'll care about the terms they sign with.
reply
I don't get the sense that Elon's companies care much for the contracts they sign.

e.g. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/12/twitter-stiffs-s...

I wouldn't trust a contract from one of Elon's companies unless they were willing to put in escrow an amount that would make me whole in case of a breach on their side. (And that amount would be quite large in the case of a potential breach involving using prompt data for training.)

reply
> Cursor still has a lot of developer data that can assist in building a model

Their composer model is seriously good. I’ve been eyeing a cursor sub just to use it in OpenCode. They have a nice moat here.

> Cursor have decent enterprise relationships (while for xAI it is ~zero)

That has a reason. Those enterprise relationships are almost certainly going to sour at least a bit, if not for Musk‘s toxic image then for his erratic behavior.

reply
Yeah, Composer 2 is legitimately so impressive. It is my daily driver right now both on professional and personal projects. I only find myself reaching for 5.3 Codex/GPT 5.4 when exploring a lot of technical documentation or code and for Sonnet/Opus when working on UI. Everything else is Composer.
reply
Even if it wasn't for Musk, are these relationships really worth so much? There is a certain value in being on the approved vendor list, but it seems to me that there really isn't a lot of vendor lock-in. I think most people could switch to opencode, claude code or codex pretty easily. Maybe these relationships would be worth a lot if companies signed long-term contracts, but I doubt many did.
reply
Just to point it out, Cursor has not made any good models themselves. Composer 2 is Kimi K2.5, and they tried to pass it as their own until people noticed that the api specified it as Kimi.
reply
Cursor has released a technical paper [1] and several blog posts [2] describing the continued pretraining and RL they do on top of Kimi K2.5.

It is true that they were not transparent about the base model that they used until the model slug was discovered by a Twitter user via the API.

[1]: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.24477 [2]: https://cursor.com/blog/real-time-rl-for-composer

reply
Kimi is the base, but they've done tons of finetuning on top to produce a really good completions model.
reply
I think it also represents a bet that in some sense Cursor's model capabilities are resource limited rather than talent limited. If that's true, $60B will end up being a bargain. If not true, well it's an expensive lesson but that's the nature of things.
reply
Forgot that claude is burning good will from it's own capacity constraints, leading to periods of 'dumbness'. It's a catalyst to cause me and others to switch back to cursor if they can get their act together
reply
> despite no longer being in vogue with consumer devs Cursor still has a lot of developer data that can assist in building a model

care to share more about this?

reply
You forgot to consider whether all this is worth $60B.
reply
> forgot to consider whether all this is worth $60B

I see two possibilities:

(1) SpaceX is paying with stock; and

(2) the $60bn pay-out is (a) conditional or (b) never going to be exercised—it was a stalking horse for negotiating the $10bn terms, which gives SpaceX everything it actually wants.

reply
I think both a) and b) can both be true. We dont know what the contingency is - could be something absurd.

Also one would definitely offer to pay in stock if they believe it is massively over-valued lmao.

reply
$1B to $2B ARR in a few months with projection of $6B ARR by years end. If xAi wants to have it's own tools just like OpenAI and Anthropic, then it's not an unusual move.
reply
Extrapolating from a few months to a full year and calling it Annual Recurring Revenue is one of modern startup valuation gimmicks that I cannot not laugh at.

Sometimes it helps to go back to the basics to understand company performance: money in, money out?

reply
it's not dollars it's X bucks
reply
> despite no longer being in vogue with consumer devs

Is it in vogue with enterprise devs?

reply
deleted
reply
British?

“Cursor have” and “Cursor are” is awkward to read.

reply
Now you know what it feels like to be British reading practically any other English source on the Internet.
reply
That's not British, that's just old people
reply
deleted
reply
hn is this true
reply