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

Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 180 posts

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#121

Post by fooster »

hakunin wrote: post #118
miroljub wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cursor Composer 1 was Qwen and this is Kimi. IDE is based on VSCode. The entire company is build on packaging open source and reselling it. The question is, where's the outrage? Why are there no headlines "USA steals Chinese tech?" "All USA can do is make a cheap copy of Chinese SOTA models". > So funny to see Twitter go wild saying "a 50 person team just beat Anthropic" blah blah. Well, if it's an American company…

Do you think Chinese LLMs acquired training data legitimately? I think the whole situation is a bit funny, but I don't think the US "started it" to be fair.

I mean as if anthropic and openai did.

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#122

Post by varispeed »

I noticed something strange with Cursor lately. When I am using Opus 4.6, sometimes it is giving ridiculously dumb answers as if they were actually using something like Qwen with a prompt to present itself as Opus. I have to close the session and start again hoping I'll get actual Opus.

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#123

Post by maronato »

gillesjacobs wrote: post #7

Cursor is mostly an IDE / coding-agent harness company. So it probably makes sense for them not to train their own base model, but instead license something like Kimi and fine-tune it for their own harness and workflows. Their moat looks pretty thin. A VSCode fork with an open-source LLM fork on top. In the fast-moving coding-agent market, it’s not obvious they keep their massive valuation forever.

The problem is that it seems they didn't license it: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HD2Ky9jW4AAAe0Y?format=jpg&name=...

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#124

Post by merlindru »

varispeed wrote: post #122

I noticed something strange with Cursor lately. When I am using Opus 4.6, sometimes it is giving ridiculously dumb answers as if they were actually using something like Qwen with a prompt to present itself as Opus. I have to close the session and start again hoping I'll get actual Opus.

There's no shot they're doing that. Would be suicide as soon as anyone notices, and by the looks of it, they didn't even clean up the URL here to "hide" the fact that this is Kimi K2.5 so i doubt there's any grand conspiracy here.

What's way more likely is that Opus has been quantized by anthropic or something similar. Or that Opus was updated and didn't work well with Cursor's harness after. Or a token caching issue. Etc.

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#125

Post by merlindru »

genthree wrote: post #91
agluszak wrote: post #9

A hyped startup providing zero added value, burning investor money only to repackage somebody else's work? That's new... /s

Incompetently repackaging. They started with VSCode so nearly all the work was already done, but still managed to make it leak memory like it's infinite. The power of AI slop! Their product is an anti-advertisement for the core concept of itself, which is kind of impressive.

I like Cursor's AI projects a lot. Cursor Tab is truly impressive. But you couldn't be more right.

I just downloaded VSCode again today after Cursor's latest update dropped my editor to 5 FPS or so (legitimately unusable. not hyperbole.) and holy shit it feels snappy. Completely forgot what it's like.

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#126

Post by 827a »

FYI: Someone from Cursor has responded to this https://x.com/leerob/status/2035035355364081694

I think there's a reason why the people from Moonshot deleted their tweets; they're probably just researchers who got yelled at by the people who actually knew what was going on at Moonshot.

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#127

Post by manojlds »

827a wrote: post #126

FYI: Someone from Cursor has responded to this https://x.com/leerob/status/2035035355364081694 I think there's a reason why the people from Moonshot deleted their tweets; they're probably just researchers who got yelled at by the people who actually knew what was going on at Moonshot.

But that makes no sense - what are inference partner terms?

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#128

Post by manojlds »

jstanley wrote: post #3
Sammi wrote: post #2

As a paying customer, it just doesn't feel good that they are trying to pass off someone else's model as their own. I mean I guess this is what businesses do all the time. There's a term for it even, it's called white-labeling. But is this all that Cursor have? They pass of VS Code as their own, they pass off Kimi as their own... What do Cursor even do? What do I need them for?

As a paying customer, I don't care where the model comes from, I only care how good it is.

And how cheap it is

Re: Cursor Composer 2 is just Kimi K2.5 with RL

#130

Post by Eridrus »

saidmukhamad wrote: post #30
lmc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is on their website... "Is Kimi K2.5 open source?" "Yes, Kimi K2.5 is an open source AI model. Developers and researchers can explore its architecture, build new solutions, and experiment openly. Model weights and code are publicly available on Hugging Face and the official GitHub repository." https://www.kimi.com/ai-models/kimi-k2-5

4th paragraph in license block Our only modification part is that, if the Software (or any derivative works thereof) is used for any of your commercial products or services that have more than 100 million monthly active users, or more than 20 million US dollars (or equivalent in other currencies) in monthly revenue, you shall prominently display "Kimi K2.5" on the user interface of such product or service.

Cursor have said they are using Composer through their inference provider (Fireworks). Presumably the MIT is not viral like the GPL, so Cursor, and companies that use Cursor do not need to display Kimi attribution on their products.

It's definitely not what Kimi wanted, but it sounds like this is what is written.

Post reply on HN