131–140 of 180 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wouldn't be regardless, because the model is open weights, not open source. It's just a license.
Which contradicts what they say on their website.
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. Ollama is also doing this. There is so much money to be made repackaging open source these days. So funny to see Twitter go wild saying "a 50 person team just beat Anthropic" blah blah.
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. Ollama is also doing this. There is so much money to be made repackaging open source these days. So funny to see Twitter go wild saying "a 50 person team just beat Anthropic" blah blah.
> 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…
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. Ollama is also doing this. There is so much money to be made repackaging open source these days. So funny to see Twitter go wild saying "a 50 person team just beat Anthropic" blah blah.
"Just" Kimi K2.5 with RL—people really misunderstand how difficult it is to achieve these reults with RL. Cursor's research team is highly respected within the industry, and what they've done is quite impressive. Before people go jumping to conclusions about model theft, it's worth considering the possibility that they did reach an agreement with Moonshot which their researchers were not aware of. That would certainl…
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?
People need to seriously stop it with the whole reddit-esque Boston Marathon Bomber investigation-style low-info crusades. Its extremely unhealthy for both your own mental state and the state of discourse on the internet. Even if Cursor misbehaved (they did not): Your life is not materially changed whether they did or did not. Use it, or don't use it; these things are a matter that lies exclusively between Cursor and Moonshot.
I'm annoyed that we still don't know for certain which base model they used for Cursor 1. This feels really rude to me. I have no problem with them fine-tuning open weight models to create their own - they are getting great results, and Cursor's research term should be respected for that. But deliberately hiding the base model they use is disrespectful of the researchers who created that model.
"Just" Kimi K2.5 with RL—people really misunderstand how difficult it is to achieve these reults with RL. Cursor's research team is highly respected within the industry, and what they've done is quite impressive. Before people go jumping to conclusions about model theft, it's worth considering the possibility that they did reach an agreement with Moonshot which their researchers were not aware of. That would certainl…
The amount of angst people feel the need to have against ai is incredible. We all seemed to want open weights, but it's time to take offense when open weights are used as intended?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which contradicts what they say on their website.
Although it is not OSI approved, the license theoretically didn't add any more restrictions beyond attribution, which stays in line with The Open Source Definition.
Anyway, if it was clear cut, it shouldn't be difficult to get it approved.
These kinds of discussions show why it's a pain to use non standard licenses.