261–270 of 518 posts
It's always been clear to me that Cursor's business model of reselling others' APIs had its days numbered. Not necessarily because the providers would pull the plug, but because you wouldn't be able to compete with subsidized plans. Cursor is already kind of useless for third party models unless you're willing to spend thousands of dollars. It's only worth it if you're going to use mostly grok/composer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's ironic how AI companies are re-inventing their own form of privately enforced copyright, lobby the government to ban foreign competitors that don't respect it etc., all while spending the last 5 years fighting tooth and nail against the copyright of the training material they're using. If you can take any book and turn it into a model, because it's "transformative enough", and "AI learns just like a person does"…
Companies are well within their rights to choose who they sell to. I don't see how this is 'privately enforced copyright'. Also, copyright has always been privately enforced anyway?
On the third hand, the settlement Anthropic famously had to pay was for copyright infringement because they didn't actually have the right to even access some of the training data they used, so I can see how this might be compatible with the law.
On the fourth hand, I'm saying that as someone who absolutely isn't a lawyer and sometimes gets surprised when reading about copyright cases that sure sound like they ought to have been trademark cases given my limited understanding.
Cursor founder just tweeted that he was sad to see this ban and that OpenAI model represented around 5% of total usage. Burn.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe if this was true, we'd already be seeing vibed stuff succeeding everywhere, and pricing out incumbents, but I guess I'm not seeing this? Like at all? Even if they have Astra or whatever completely to themselves, how do they deal with the -product- side? Or sales, or account management? They've been focused on juicing model's coding capabilities, but it's absolutely -not- "gen ai" enough to be doing the whol…
They don’t need to make you or me, people who actually make software, believe that every anthropic employee is actually and in fact, right now, a „10x software factory controlling thousands of agents“, they need to make investors and CEOs believe, and then hope that making that true is possible and that they can keep the fiction up long enough and get enough money and infra built out to make it actually true.
[1] If anything, Waymo has a higher chance and global Waymo adoption is probably 20 years into the future, at least.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anthropic seems to have no issues: https://x.com/NotTomBrown/status/2093541294027280657?s=20
Remind me to set up public nitter so I can post a nitter link to whatever this is, and then I can read it.
What a shame for Cursor. I found it a great tool - I actually liked Composer 2.5; but now being bought by SpaceX has for a while left a bad taste - and they keep pushing Grok and now GrokBot. I took the 50% discount instead of cancelling - but with this I'll likely not renew. So sad to watch them go from great to mediocre in such a short time.
Anthropic already banned xAI for very similar ToS violations earlier this year: https://x.com/kyliebytes/status/2009686466746822731?s=46 So this is OpenAI following suit after Musk admitted to distilling their models. This was bound to happen once Cursor decided to sell itself to a competing model provider. It'll be interesting to see if Anthropic applies their ban to Cursor, or if that datacenter deal they signed wi…
It's ironic how AI companies are re-inventing their own form of privately enforced copyright, lobby the government to ban foreign competitors that don't respect it etc., all while spending the last 5 years fighting tooth and nail against the copyright of the training material they're using. If you can take any book and turn it into a model, because it's "transformative enough", and "AI learns just like a person does"…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
God I hope so. My workplace enforces Cursor use, and to see it lose GPT and Claude would absolutely make my day. Much has been invested in getting us to "use the right models", a list in which Grok does not feature.
Isn't Cursor owned by xAI ergo Grok?
Anthropic already banned xAI for very similar ToS violations earlier this year: https://x.com/kyliebytes/status/2009686466746822731?s=46 So this is OpenAI following suit after Musk admitted to distilling their models. This was bound to happen once Cursor decided to sell itself to a competing model provider. It'll be interesting to see if Anthropic applies their ban to Cursor, or if that datacenter deal they signed wi…
Why you would trust Elon Musk to not hack you and steal your model weights is beyond me, but maybe they intend to use that compute just for training, still I’m sure there’s plenty of research there to take too…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's ironic how AI companies are re-inventing their own form of privately enforced copyright, lobby the government to ban foreign competitors that don't respect it etc., all while spending the last 5 years fighting tooth and nail against the copyright of the training material they're using. If you can take any book and turn it into a model, because it's "transformative enough", and "AI learns just like a person does"…
I am pretty sure that the goal of these companies at the end is ruling more than what governments can. Just look at the pattern... they collude, they provide to them whatever is needed, and at some point, if this is not true yet, they will be the ones who will tell them what to do or not, bc you know how humans are, right... blackmailing, mess up the business or shames of people, etc. It is just a matter of time. The…
So much for the all-powerful cabal.