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

Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 540 posts

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#431

Post by delecti »

david-gpu wrote: post #428
delecti wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pick up nearly any published book. Turn to the ~3rd page. There will be either a whole page, or sometimes the second half of a page, dedicated to a copyright notice. Very nearly every published book I've ever seen has that identical page. This isn't a recent thing. I grabbed my copy of Diaspora by Greg Egan and opposite the table of contents is a page that starts like this: Copyright (C) 1998, 2015 by Greg Egan First…

Standard copyright boilerplate. Not terms of service distinct from copyright, which is the subject of this thread.

If you read the whole copyright page of a book and come away with the conclusion that it's anything but terms of use for the book, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#432

Post by verdverm »

bentt wrote: post #402
oh_no wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you dont like giving openai money but you're fine with spacex? not criticizing, just trying to understand.

Honestly, I've been a Cursor subscriber for a while and it was just momentum. Still, I rank OpenAI as the worst actor among the big AI companies. I think OpenAI's playbook will be a repeat of Facebook. Users are the product x 1000. Cursor/SpaceX/Grok is a different beast. I think they will cheat other companies but I'm not convinced yet that they have it out for users. We'll see. I'm certainly not some kind of Cursor…

I'm not keen on OpenCode long term after seeing their CEO engage in antics and their discord being rather unprofessional, but it is a great harness for the time being, still has gaps though

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#433

Post by beckhamc »

jackjeff wrote: post #194

Is there some kind of alternative to Cursor in these terms - fast because the code is already indexed no need to start every prompt rediscovering the world with rg - in editor/vscode review much better than relying on git diff at the very end. You can click on next button to jump there. Quick edit in place. Or a quick prompt (seconds) to fix something small - in editor completion / quick edits, when you do things by…

Interesting to see someone else is in the same boat as I am. Regarding editor review I agree, surely the solution would be to `git diff` at the end, but if you only want to git diff what was literally just changed by the agent it means you'd have to commit as you go so that your git diffs are more localised. And then at the end of your work just squash the commits. But it feels annoying. (EDIT: ok I forgot about git staging, that seems to be better)

I mainly use Cursor for another reason though: all of my work is remote over SSH and I don't like keystroke latency, so I prefer code editing / agent conversations to feel local. (Everything else is done in the terminal.) But I would also prefer to use something less propriety. I may go back to VSCode with plugins to achieve a similar experience.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#434

Post by dominotw »

jackjeff wrote: post #242
barrenko wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May be opencode2 in the near future. Sample (not affiliated) ~ 1. download opencode2 2. settings > tabs > vertical 3. add worktree setup to agents.md 4. use /diff to review changes 5. use commands for commit, sync and push

I don’t see how opencode 2 (or 1) addresses any of my concerns. I thought it might avoid rg/grep the code base on every prompt but does not even seem to be the case.

how is index superior to rg ?

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#435

Post by redox99 »

echelon wrote: post #20
redox99 wrote: post #9

It's always been clear to me that Cursor's business model of reselling others' APIs had its days numbered. Not necessarily because the providers would pull the plug, but because you wouldn't be able to compete with subsidized plans. Cursor is already kind of useless for third party models unless you're willing to spend thousands of dollars. It's only worth it if you're going to use mostly grok/composer.

Alternate take: open source models and model routers are the real bang for your buck. Subsidized plan or not.

Codex sub is way cheaper than equally strong models on openrouter.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#436

Post by oblio »

oblio wrote: post #202
dannyw wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies are well within their rights to choose who they sell to. I don't see how this is 'privately enforced copyright'. Also, copyright has always been privately enforced anyway?

DMCA? Which is actually an American law enforced globally? Enforcement ultimately happens through law and the legal system.

Downvoters: am I wrong or do you just not like what I'm saying?

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#437

Post by ctrlkctrls »

tanepiper wrote: post #179

What a shame for Cursor. I found it a great tool - I actually liked Composer 2.5; but now being bought by SpaceX has for a while left a bad taste - and they keep pushing Grok and now GrokBot. I took the 50% discount instead of cancelling - but with this I'll likely not renew. So sad to watch them go from great to mediocre in such a short time.

Didn't Kamprad have some pretty strong ties to the Nazi party? Yet you have a bad taste in your mouth because Cursor gets bought by SpaceX!

Virtue signaling in glass houses...

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#438

Post by semiquaver »

aeternum wrote: post #163
semiquaver wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really an excuse? As the release points out, musk admitted under oath to distilling OpenAI’s models to produce xai models on an ongoing basis. Whatever you think about goose for the gander wrt IP theft, I wouldn’t voluntarily do business with a competitor who was actively and brazenly flouting my terms, would you?

OpenAI's models are distilled from your HN posts

Quite sure I covered that aspect, thanks.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#439

Post by dannyw »

oblio wrote: post #436
oblio wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DMCA? Which is actually an American law enforced globally? Enforcement ultimately happens through law and the legal system.

Downvoters: am I wrong or do you just not like what I'm saying?

I consider publicly enforced to be one where a government agency (e.g. the FDA), or prosecutors make judgements in what cases they file, make the arguments, etc.

Otherwise, it's just a standard case between two private parties resolved through our legal system; e.g. Linkedin vs Hi5.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#440

Post by CommieBobDole »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #414
WiSaGaN wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's one of the things you need to do if you want your company to later become the only company in the world. They also promised that they would treat you nicely afterwards after they get what they want.

> become the only company in the world This is not a necessary end state. It is the byproduct of the disease of sociopathic MBAs.

It does seem like a lot of the valuations and infrastructure investments for these companies only make sense if each one assumes they will be the first and only one to invent superintelligence and that it will largely replace all knowledge work.
Post reply on HN