Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B

#881

Post by calmworm »

neilpointer wrote: post #676
timwis wrote: post #616

I've tried most of the tools out there but have used cursor most consistently. Sure, some of the UI quirks get in the way sometimes, but I've found its auto complete predictions to be unparalleled. More importantly, these days I mainly use its Ask mode, Plan mode, and Agent mode. I like that I can use Opus via subscription pricing without Claude Code's wild and buggy harness. And I find cursor's plan mode to perform…

Zed is pretty good these days. With a claude subscription, you get close to the same experience as Cursor, but with an editor that's much snappier.

Signed up for Zed upon seeing this, signed in with GitHub, it failed instantly. Emailed support, they asked me to prove my ID because I was flagged as a bot. I immediately revoked access.

Fairly certain the support reply was from a bot, too. Meh.

Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B

#882

Post by itemize123 »

buzzcut_ wrote: post #747

This is a stupid comparison, but Mojang/Minecraft was acquired for 2.5 billion in 2014. Arguably the most popular video game of all time, which has brought joy to hundreds of millions of people for years and years, was valued at 1/20th of an AI startup that will soon disappear into irrelevance. While Minecraft is just a game, I'd argue it has more societal value than Cursor. The way things are valued is nonsensical t…

u cant compare productivity to games on the metric of bring joy - ofc productivity tool isn't bring joy like a game does.

Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B

#883

Post by mjrbrennan »

frays wrote: post #102

Is anyone on HN still actually using Cursor in 2026? Everyone I've spoken with is now using either Claude Code or Codex (or Copilot because their companies force them to).

Yes, I use it as my daily driver at Discourse, the Cursor Tab autocompletion is still the best AI-based editor autocomplete I have used. I switched to nvim earlier in the year because there was no real great AI integrations that didn't feel cumbersome, Cursor in vim mode is a much nicer experience, I like adding lines of code to agent context and so on. All of the extensions from VSCode, LSP integration, and so on are really nice.

That being said I do a lot of work in Codex or Claude now (they all feel pretty much the same to me), and use Claude for manual code writing and tweaks that I feel would be unnecessary for agents to do, or just when I am writing code that I enjoy writing, typically when exploring a new problem I'm interested in, not everything needs to be done at 1000% speed by a robot.

Though I will likely reconsider this now that Elon will own it, either moving to VSCode or to Zed long-term.

Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B

#884

Post by oefrha »

fastball wrote: post #744
davebren wrote: post #680

> "In its IPO filing, the company had said Cursor's access to developers' data, including coding requests and design decisions, could help improve its AI models such as Grok." They're all stealing your IP and selling it back to your competitors in the form of tokens.

Yes, that is in fact how models get better at coding. Such a ridiculous stance: "I want LLMs to code for me, but I want them to be trained on other people's code, not mine, duh".

Sounds good? They can pay for code they want to train on. There are plenty of companies sending me offers to code training materials for them for $50-100/hr. Don’t expect to charge me an arm and a leg for inference and then also train on my code.

Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B

#889

Post by hakfoo »

echelon wrote: post #623
redox99 wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also work with C++, and I use Codex (desktop) which writes 99.99% of my code, plus Visual Studio, which is nice for reading and navigating code. For webdev I do VSCode + Codex. I started with Cursor back in the day, but switched to Claude Code and then Codex when Cursor got too expensive. If price wasn't an issue, maybe I'd prefer Cursor only because I can easily switch between models. But that's it. I always disli…

Fable makes any IDE AI integration almost entirely unnecessary. Claude one shots pretty much everything, and fixing any small errors is easier when just talking to Claude again. Anthropic is going to offer better pricing using their agentic harness. Why pay more for less? An IDE at this point is best as a tool for code review. They need to start building better code review tools.

I can't quite understand the "fixing small errors is easier when just talking to Claude" flow.

I tried having it write some tests today. It got very close to what I want, but picked a stupid set of input values (two fields that look independent that should only be used with related values). I thought about "how do I explain this" and then just went in and fixed it myself.

How is it easier to write "Okay, go back to testBlah and change xxx to yyy" versus clicking on XXX in the IDE and typing YYY by hand? Maybe if you had 500 faulty tests and were forbidden from using search-and-replace for some reason.

It makes sense when code generation is the limiting factor, but I end up with a lot of changes where the actual code delta is smaller than the necessary prompt to convince the bot to produce it.

Post reply on HN