91–100 of 238 posts
> Composer 2.5 is built on the same open-source checkpoint as Composer 2, Moonshot's Kimi K2.5. Really nice to see they're giving credit to the company and I am optimistic Kimi K open models soon will outperform Opus models
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling. The Jevons paradox applies here. The cheaper software is, the more software is written. There is not a finite demand for software.
> 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 ?
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 ?
Opus 4.5 became significantly cheaper directly per token
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
In my setup I use multiple agents like Claude Code and Codex, and Zed’s ACP support makes it pretty nice to manage them all as “threads” in one place. Worktree switching also feels much smoother.
Overall the experience was pretty good, but the way the agent and editor are integrated still feels a bit lacking, and tab completion is the big one for me. Cursor’s tab completion is still the best I’ve used.
So now I’m using both. For work that needs a lot of focus and careful iteration, I use Cursor. For things that are easy to split into worktrees and hand off to agents, I use Zed with Claude/Codex.
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.
The ironic thing is that half a year ago, after trying factory.ai I thought chat-first interface was a stupid idea that will never work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling. The Jevons paradox applies here. The cheaper software is, the more software is written. There is not a finite demand for software.
> 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 ?
2. We are not interested in how different model naming schemes relate to prices, we are interested in the capabilities. So if you want to learn something about price development you need comparative levels of capabilities, and then look at the prices. 4o is not comparable to 5.5 in the first regard. It is (according to the benchmarks) maybe more comparable to current 5 nano - which is 98% cheaper.
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
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
AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling. The Jevons paradox applies here. The cheaper software is, the more software is written. There is not a finite demand for software.
Apart from that, I'm not sure if focusing on tokens is even a good idea, because they are so different from model to model. I'd almost consider them a red herring now.
We could look at tasks instead. Is there anything even remotely suggesting that your typical task you give an LLM now costs less in inference than before?
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.
why is that part impressive specifically? they got purchased by SpaceX, they have access to infinite compute and cash now. & now they're still losing all of their users to Claude Code and Codex.
Why pay for Cursor when I can use GLM 5.1, Kimi K2.6, MiniMax M2.7, Xiaomi MiMo V2.5 Pro and Deepseek v4 for cheap and use whatever harness I want, including Claude Code.
It's not like Cursor harness is the best out there.
And even if I want to edit the code, I don't need to run the agent harness in an IDE.