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

151–160 of 180 posts

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

#151

Post by Aurornis »

granitepail wrote: post #139
halJordan wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Hey, what do you know—Moonshot came out and explained that Cursor was operating within the licensing agreement. https://x.com/kimi_moonshot/status/2035074972943831491

Earlier their employees were Tweeting that Cursor did not have a license ( https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HD2Ky9jW4AAAe0Y?format=jpg&name=... ) so Moonshot employees are partially to blame for the outrage.

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

#152

Post by Aurornis »

kgeist wrote: post #48
justindotdev wrote: post #5

im pretty sure this is in violation of moonshot's ToS. this is going to be fun to watch unfold

At the same time, Moonshot violated Anthropic's ToS by training on their models' outputs :) [0]. And Anthropic violated copyright law by training on copyrighted material. It's violations all the way down. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47126614

> And Anthropic violated copyright law by training on copyrighted material

Training on copyrighted material does not violate copyright laws (despite what many will assume)

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

#153

Post by hakunin »

geocar wrote: post #143
hakunin wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Do you think Chinese LLMs acquired training data legitimately? I think they probably acquire it in accordance with Chinese law. > but I don't think the US "started it" to be fair. Who are you quoting with those marks? Started what? To be fair to whom?

> I think they probably acquire it in accordance with Chinese law.

You can easily look up[1] how China struggles with effective enforcement of IP laws.

And specifically for LLMs, Anthropic recently claimed that Chinese models trained on it without permission.[2]

> Who are you quoting with those marks?

Double quote marks have other uses besides direct quotes, such as signaling unusual usage.[3] In this case, talking about countries like they're squabbling kids.

> Started what?

Fishy use of others' IP, packaging others' work without attribution.

> To be fair to whom?

To US companies using Chinese LLMs without attribution.

---

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_intellectual_pr...

[2]: https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinese-companies-used-c...

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_marks_in_English#Sig...

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

#154

Post by array_key_first »

tempaccount420 wrote: post #145
lmc wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This 'Modified MIT' is not a license that has been through the OSI process: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_Source_Definition#Com... You can't just add random terms to an existing license and use its name. "Modified MIT: Like MIT but pay us 50 million dollars." Perhaps CC-BY would've been more appropriate.

Ah yes, a document titled "*THE* Open Source Definition", describing *THEIR* definition of open source.

Their definition matters more than most, I mean, anyone can define anything however they like. Hell, Windows is open-source, because I said so.

Also, even if it were not for the OSI, this still wouldn't be open source. Because there's no source code available. It's open-weight, which is a different thing. The models weights are, essentially, the "compiled" output. The input and algorithms, we don't know.

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

#155

Post by MintPaw »

bearjaws wrote: post #81
dmix wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cursor’s integration is much deeper than just plugging an LLM into VSCode That said I have a feeling both VSCode and Claude code will catch up to their integration. But neither comes close yet (I say that as someone who mainly uses Claude Code).

As a command line junkie, what is the main thing Claude Code needs to catch up with cursor? I haven't dove into using a LLM in my editor, so I am less familiar with workflows there.

In cursor:

You can copy/paste or drag code snippets the chat window and they automatically become context like. (@myFile.cpp:300-310)

You can click any of the generated diffs in the assistant chat window to instantly jump to the code.

Generated code just appears as diffs till you manually approve each snippet or file. (which is fairly easy to do with "jump to next snippet/file" buttons)

These are all features I use constantly as someone who doesn't vibe but wants to just say "pack/unpack this struct into json", "add this new property to the struct, add it to the serialization, and the UI", and other true busywork tasks.

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

#156

Post by lukaslalinsky »

HeavyStorm wrote: post #55

There's no "just" in RL. Fine tuning is very important and could make a lot of difference.

Indeed, this is quite obvious on Claude models vs Gemini. I fully believe Gemini is more powerful model, but the post training process is nowhere near what Anthropic does, which results in Gemini being horrible at coding sessions, while Claude is excellent.

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

#157

Post by satvikpendem »

hakunin wrote: post #153
geocar wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you think Chinese LLMs acquired training data legitimately? I think they probably acquire it in accordance with Chinese law. > but I don't think the US "started it" to be fair. Who are you quoting with those marks? Started what? To be fair to whom?

> I think they probably acquire it in accordance with Chinese law. You can easily look up[1] how China struggles with effective enforcement of IP laws. And specifically for LLMs, Anthropic recently claimed that Chinese models trained on it without permission.[2] > Who are you quoting with those marks? Double quote marks have other uses besides direct quotes, such as signaling unusual usage.[3] In this case, talking a…

They said Chinese law, which is not the same as American law, and presumably using IP the way they have is legal there, if indeed they actually did, as allegations of IP theft are just that, allegations, and even if they weren't, all nations in the history of mankind have been "stealing" "intellectual property" since forever, including the US from Britain, literally with the good graces of the fledgling US government [0].

As to what Anthropic said, it's quite specious as this analysis shows [1], ie the amount of "exchanges" is only tantamount to a single day or two of promoting, not nearly enough to actually get good RL training data from. Regardless, it's not as if other American LLM companies obtained training data legitimately, whatever that means in today's world.

[0] https://theworld.org/stories/2014/02/18/us-complains-other-n...

[1] https://youtu.be/_k22WAEAfpE

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

#158

Post by satvikpendem »

MintPaw wrote: post #155
bearjaws wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a command line junkie, what is the main thing Claude Code needs to catch up with cursor? I haven't dove into using a LLM in my editor, so I am less familiar with workflows there.

In cursor: You can copy/paste or drag code snippets the chat window and they automatically become context like. (@myFile.cpp:300-310) You can click any of the generated diffs in the assistant chat window to instantly jump to the code. Generated code just appears as diffs till you manually approve each snippet or file. (which is fairly easy to do with "jump to next snippet/file" buttons) These are all features I use c…

This all happens in VSCode now too and it's half the price for way more usage compared to Cursor. That Microsoft money sure does subsidize things.

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

#159

Post by satvikpendem »

faangguyindia wrote: post #148
mohsen1 wrote: post #22

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.

It just means Kursor is sharing data with Chinese llm which enables them to improve their LLM by training on outputs and input of all data which cursor collects. It's a two way street.

No, they self host the Chinese open source LLMs, not use their APIs.

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

#160

Post by geocar »

hakunin wrote: post #153
geocar wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you think Chinese LLMs acquired training data legitimately? I think they probably acquire it in accordance with Chinese law. > but I don't think the US "started it" to be fair. Who are you quoting with those marks? Started what? To be fair to whom?

> I think they probably acquire it in accordance with Chinese law. You can easily look up[1] how China struggles with effective enforcement of IP laws. And specifically for LLMs, Anthropic recently claimed that Chinese models trained on it without permission.[2] > Who are you quoting with those marks? Double quote marks have other uses besides direct quotes, such as signaling unusual usage.[3] In this case, talking a…

> You can easily look up[1] how China struggles with effective enforcement of IP laws.

I didn't see anything in there about Chinese companies violating Chinese law.

Can you so easily look up how American companies struggle with effective enforcement of Chinese IP laws? I think it should be pretty easy to see how American companies struggle with effective enforcement of European IP laws, and I can tell you it is similar.

From here, it is not so clear that the US can even enforce its own laws at the moment.

> signaling unusual usage

Thank you!

> In this case, talking about countries like they're squabbling kids.

> > Started what?

> Fishy use of others' IP, packaging others' work without attribution.

I see. I guess if China is 3000 years old then maybe obviously, because the US is such a young country by comparison.

So you think it is "fair"[1] to violate Chinese Law because there were people in China who violated US law first?

If so, I think that is pretty childish.

[1]: I am trying it out!

Post reply on HN