I like Cursor as a product but the add on cost of $0.25/M tokens is just too expensive on top of the models.
Yeah, I don't understand how this business model continues to produce revenue.
Revenue? In that industry?
SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
171–180 of 1001 posts
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#172I realized a while back that Elon Musk isn't Iron Man. His superhero (or supervillain depending on your view) persona is ZIRP Man, the master of riding successive credit expansion and speculative waves. It's sort of ironic that he at least pays lip service to some Austrian-style quasi-libertarian economic ideas, because the Federal Reserve created him. Now he's surfing the AI wave. We are no longer technically in ZIR…
Elon Musk has exactly one talent, and it's being the greatest master of financial chicanery the world has ever seen.
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#173Is anyone on HN still actually using Cursor in 2026? Everyone I've spoken with is now using either Claude Code or Codex (or Copilot because their companies force them to).
I use Cursor for coding. I like to review the changes via the UI. Plan mode is also really strong in Cursor. It bugs me less about needing to search through files and basic coding tasks. I find it also saves the company a ton of money compared to Claude, Claude burns through tokens with no regard.
I typically use Claude for interacting with MCPs and skills to operate on live systems.
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#174Does anyone here think Cursor is overvalued? It's just packaging up what already exists, it has no moat or IP.
Cursor was nice when I was still meticulously hand coding my stack, fantastic autocomplete. With today's top models, I barely write code myself, just review commits. Cursor eats Opus credits like there is no tomorrow. Composer has been a net negative in my experience. All in on Codex with GPT 5.5 on high using /fast.
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#175How are these numbers even working out, I get free markets and all that, but Microsoft paid 2.5B for Minecraft, which was printing money at the time (seems they still lost on that deal). Now a rocket company is buying an editor company for 60B and everyone seems to think that makes sense. I’m happy to be old man yelling at clouds here because I can’t for the life of me figure out these valuations and purchases.
There's a lot of investment in AI for its potential. An AI editor company might never make 60B itself, but it might help another AI company grow faster (relative to its competitors, who might also want to buy the AI editor company). What else can an AI giant do with all that money? Build in-house: they do, and there's only so fast they can hire/build. Save? Yes, still do, but if they save it all, and let competitors…
But surely 60B could buy you something better if you want to spend money on AI. The number seems completely arbitrary, would Cursor say no to 40B?
I really don’t see Cursor as bringing them anything of actual value, it’s more of a bragging thing, but I can be very wrong.
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#176For what it's worth, this was effectively announced months ago, and at this valuation.
But they (SpaceX) could have backed out of the deal at any given time as they had the option to (and be required to pay the 10B break up fee). Nobody knew what would happen at the time. This announcement is a definitive agreement of the acquisition at that $60B valuation.
Yes, that's what was said basically. The pedantry is not adding anything to the conversation.
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#177I realized a while back that Elon Musk isn't Iron Man. His superhero (or supervillain depending on your view) persona is ZIRP Man, the master of riding successive credit expansion and speculative waves. It's sort of ironic that he at least pays lip service to some Austrian-style quasi-libertarian economic ideas, because the Federal Reserve created him. Now he's surfing the AI wave. We are no longer technically in ZIR…
Elon Musk has exactly one talent, and it's being the greatest master of financial chicanery the world has ever seen.
To be honest and objective, I think he at least knows enough about engineering to hire people who know what they're doing, which is how he got here. It's not all chicanery.
Over time, though, I think he's drifted away from his original "make real things in the real world" focus and more toward "play money games" and "play political games."
It's sad. One common comic book supervillain arc is to start as a hero and become what you despise.
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#178So that accounts for about three quarters of the money SpaceX just raised then?
> about three quarters of the money SpaceX just raised then?
While rest is paid to the debters...
Most probably it will be mix of stock/cash
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#179Is anyone on HN still actually using Cursor in 2026? Everyone I've spoken with is now using either Claude Code or Codex (or Copilot because their companies force them to).
[deleted]
Re: SpaceX to buy Cursor for $60B
#180I wonder where they will take this, if they'll use the Cursor team to help make Grok Build (which is not just a tool like Claude Code, but an actual Grok model too) more refined for programming? Would make sense to me, and in turn also provide Cursor with more compute they can use.
It also provides xAI with a pre-existing enterprise distribution channel. At the end of the day, distribution is equally as important as the underlying product itself and in some cases is even more critical.
I think that's another thing, while I would like to test Grok more, the Grok AI plans are very generic and not tailored specifically for programming, which is frustrating because I get maybe 8 hours out of Grok for $40 for an entire month, I do wonder if they offered a "Grok Build only plan" if it would actually give me access to more compute. Maybe they intend on making it through Cursor.
I do hope that Cursor doesn't remove any of its current model offerings, and just offers Grok Build in addition to what they already offer, in my opinion unless most of their clients "switch" to Grok (like metrics show they're mostly using Grok vs other models), it would make more sense.