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

461–470 of 515 posts

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#461

Post by a4isms »

trollbridge wrote: post #336
DonsDiscountGas wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then surely a model distilling another model is transformative and fair use. Yes it is, in the legal/copyright sense of fair use. That's why they ban it in their TOS. Which customers agree to when signing up for the service.

My website’s TOS says not to use it to train AI without permission, yet my website is in the training set of all the big models. So… my TOS doesn’t matter, but theirs does?

> my TOS doesn’t matter, but theirs does?

Wilhoit Conservatism: In-groups protected by contract law but not bound by it, alongside out-groups bound by contract law, but not protected by it.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#462

Post by DefineOutside »

zxspectrum1982 wrote: post #391

I use Cursor at work and love it. It's a great IDE, the best IMHO. But it becomes really expensive. Since the introduction of the Cursor Token Rate, my company tells us to use Claude and Codex directly with Anthropic (or Vertex AI) and OpenAI, respectively. https://cursor.com/docs/models-and-pricing#cursor-token-rate I'm now using Grok 4.6 most of the time. Sonnet some times. But that's it. Cursor-native models 99% o…

It's insane that Cursor charges 25 extra cents per million tokens on a model that charges 2 cents per million cached tokens. Basically everyone is forced to use Cursor's own models at this point as otherwise the costs are simply too high.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#464

Post by stefan_ »

RetpolineDrama wrote: post #445
jurgenburgen wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems that everyone loves agentic Claude code things these days but I don’t understand how you can review what it did and remain as much in the flow as you do with cursor. The way I review it is to let it finish a PR sized slice and then I review the whole diff in a separate terminal as if it’s a PR from someone else. Then I very impolitely list the shit that needs fixing, let the LLM grind out a new batch and r…

>The way I review it is to let it finish a PR sized slice and then I review the whole diff in a separate terminal as if it’s a PR from someone else. Insanely inefficient. It's 10x more productive to watch the thinking traces and edits in real time and steer the model appropriately. If your workflow is typical no wonder my team members who use claude code are so much less productive.

I don't think this is something anyone who has ever read a "thinking trace" would unironically say. Not that you can even see them in Claude.

When thinking first started and you would still see the whole "thinking process", I thought it was a ploy to 10x token use because it was just the most inane bullshit. "But wait, the user is asking me to" in loops.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#465

Post by xaxbxcxdxe »

nkrisc wrote: post #318
jorvi wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did we not watch every single supposedly powerful US tech CEO immediately drop in supplication and kiss Trump's ring as soon as he became president? And when Jack Ma got mouthy, Xi locked him in a basement for 3 months and then kept him in exile for another 5 years. So much for the all-powerful cabal.

> Did we not watch every single supposedly powerful US tech CEO immediately drop in supplication and kiss Trump's ring as soon as he became president? Because they know it will work. You don’t have to watch Trump speak for very long to know he’s not very intelligent. Similarly, you don’t have to be much smarter than him to know how easily he can be manipulated with adulation.

Imagine how deluded you have to be about reality and how deep invested into an ideology to loose to such a moron, twice..

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#466

Post by SR2Z »

trollbridge wrote: post #336
DonsDiscountGas wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> then surely a model distilling another model is transformative and fair use. Yes it is, in the legal/copyright sense of fair use. That's why they ban it in their TOS. Which customers agree to when signing up for the service.

My website’s TOS says not to use it to train AI without permission, yet my website is in the training set of all the big models. So… my TOS doesn’t matter, but theirs does?

Your TOS matters insofar as you can prove a person actually read and agreed to it. These are illegal in different ways:

1. Copyright violations (can put you in jail) 2. TOS violations (will be a fine at worst)

Companies do get away with drive-by legal shittiness way too often and frankly the practice needs to be reined in, but at the end of the day the only damages are the financial ones you can prove in court.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#467

Post by verdverm »

richard___ wrote: post #450
verdverm wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a sane world, one should be able to choose not to do business with a company for any reason there are plenty of alternatives, 100s, so I don't think antitrust is on the table, think of this more like a boycott of the world's richest man for being a twat

you are projecting

you dont know me, so I don't know on what basis you make this claim, boycotting Elon and his companies is a real thing people do for ethical reasons, see Tesla sales as a data point

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#468

Post by othmanosx »

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…

Have you tried https://pyor.review ?

It’s not an editor in that sense but a tool optimized for reviewing PRs produced by AI.

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#469

Post by minhaz23 »

ddxv wrote: post #419
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…

I love VSCode built in LLM harness. No extensions, use any model you want, amazing UX for reviews, control of agents. The sandboxing also seems great, I never see models touching anything they shouldn't.

Is this the chat on the side or the agents feature?

Re: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceX

#470

Post by minhaz23 »

BrokenCogs wrote: post #369
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…

Vs code copilot is the same or better than cursor in my opinion - I mean that's where cursor comes from

Is this the chat on the side or the agents feature?
Post reply on HN