Live data from Hacker News

Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

cursor.com

81–90 of 238 posts

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#81
post #54

I wonder why they didn’t train off Kimi 2.6, I hope is it because they already had a good base and not that they messed up that relationship.

> and not that they messed up that relationship.

There's nothing to mess up. The license is MIT w/ attribution, and the attribution clause can be easily sidestepped w/o any legal repercussions. The "drama" was simply content creators going nuts over some misunderstandings and poor comms from some kimi related devs.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#82
post #62

I kind of want to try it, to see if and how far they can take an open model and improve it but I really don’t miss the Cursor user experience. Constant UI changes, half-baked features, smaller and smaller limits, useless AI change attribution; I think I’ll wait for others to report if it’s any good.

Isn't there a cli version of cursor by now?

Yes

https://cursor.com/cli

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#83
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not X. That's Y.

Been a bit out of the loop. What's wrong with using very short sentences like 'That's not X. That's Y.'?

Commonly used phrase by LLMs. Gives people slop vibes these days.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#84
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling Every model release now has been straight price increases since what GPT 4 ? When was the last time a new flagship model decreased prices compared to the previous one ?

token efficiency

Not seeing that either, tried really using Opus 4.7 today, and it ended up at $50 for the same kida thing that came out to $25 last week with Opus 4.6.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#85
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are still a vscode fork with no moat? Like they lost about 70% of users in half a year which goes to show how there is not even the tiniest of moat.

I feel like they've been targeting enterprise pretty hard. I know my company uses them, and the companies that hire us also use Cursor.

I can tell my company wants nothing with them.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#86

If these benches from their site hold up (they likely wont) Wouldn't this compress ai revenue like 15x quickly If they really have a 4.7 opus high equivalent at 1/16 the cost wouldn't this significantly effect all the current capex and planing Maybe they are getting elon to cover cost

The problem with this is that we do not know the actual cost. For all we know they might be pulling an Anthropic. Subsidizing costs to get users, then increasing them later on.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#87
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago. Impressive, yes. But they still don't have a moat...

I am not sure we should dismiss what they have today. Nobody has yet to come close with a full package ide that works well for coding. Is that not a moat? It is easy for my to in my head discount it, thinking that I could build something myself but between autocomplete and their workflow for agent use, it feels like they have some tangible moat emerging.

Have you tried Zed?

I haven’t tried Cursor, so don’t know how they compare, but I like Zed a lot.

Anyway, would love to see a comparison from someone who has used a recent version of each.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#88
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

token efficiency

Not seeing that either, tried really using Opus 4.7 today, and it ended up at $50 for the same kida thing that came out to $25 last week with Opus 4.6.

each model is different and nothing should be taken for granted, run your evals for your use cases. I'm not using Opus 4.7 for almost anything. I've seen very good improvements in GPTs since 5.2 and Opus 4.5 to 4.6 was quite an upgrade.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#89

Ok this might be weird but I've moved everyone in my 4 person team to our team plan and costs seem to have sky rocketed compared to the individual plans. Where before most people spent 20-100 USD, now the total bill is more like 1k USD. I haven't gone into the details but it feels like I'm being scammed.

I did some monitoring. 15 accounts, 300 millions tokens input, 200k output went to 0 the 5h quota in 7 hours. 4 parallel tasks.

I think 300 million is too low. For reference before I could do more than 1 billion on same conditions.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#90
post #2

The model is (like Composer 2) based on Kimi K2.5 and they claim SOTA performance for 1/10th of the cost. The tweet also mentions that they've started a new model from scratch on Colossus 2 (xAI/SpaceX Cluster). Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago.

>Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago.

With so much money and computing from SpaceX, is not so impressive.

Post reply on HN