upvote
> 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.

reply
Isn't their in-house model just Kimi?
reply
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.

reply
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?

reply
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.

reply
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.
reply
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.

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

reply