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

Improving Composer through real-time RL

cursor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 45 posts

Re: Improving Composer through real-time RL

#31

Post by IanCal »

hypercube33 wrote: post #16
ketzo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After seeing the last few releases for GPT and Claude, I’m not sure how anyone (else) is gonna build a durable advantage on proprietary model quality. The capabilities of the top labs’ models have improved so much in just the last few releases, and I definitely foresee a world where they gate those models away behind 1st-party harnesses/tooling.

Across my 4 different gpt subscriptions (personal, personal cursor, GitHub Copilot and cursor) all gpt5 models are junk compared to v4 - constantly ignore prompts, skills, can't write c# or powershell properly the first go, up to 5 tries. Qwen3 hands down beat it on a ryzen 5800 and 6700xt GPU even though it's slow it got the code right first try. I feel like the v5.0 preview did ok but it's slid all the way down the…

Saying gpt 5.4 is like gpt2 is wild.

Re: Improving Composer through real-time RL

#32

Post by nickphx »

m13rar wrote: post #30
hmartin wrote: post #17

Step 1: take an open source model with zero acknowledgement. Step 2: build on someone else's infrastructure innovations with zero acknowledgement. Step 3: Write a blog post with "unprecedented" and "100x" and "trillions" in the first paragraph. Seriously, this seems like cool work and enjoyed the post. But my basic trust in them has completely tanked.

I don't though it works and these guys are raking in the money. The wider audience of devs or people paying up for Cursor don't care about the morals old school OSS devs hold.

Define raking in the money. Operating at a profound loss, fueled by untenable investments and hype.. Where are they raking in the money?

Re: Improving Composer through real-time RL

#33

Post by [deleted] »

hypercube33 wrote: post #16
ketzo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After seeing the last few releases for GPT and Claude, I’m not sure how anyone (else) is gonna build a durable advantage on proprietary model quality. The capabilities of the top labs’ models have improved so much in just the last few releases, and I definitely foresee a world where they gate those models away behind 1st-party harnesses/tooling.

Across my 4 different gpt subscriptions (personal, personal cursor, GitHub Copilot and cursor) all gpt5 models are junk compared to v4 - constantly ignore prompts, skills, can't write c# or powershell properly the first go, up to 5 tries. Qwen3 hands down beat it on a ryzen 5800 and 6700xt GPU even though it's slow it got the code right first try. I feel like the v5.0 preview did ok but it's slid all the way down the…

[deleted]

Re: Improving Composer through real-time RL

#35

Post by [deleted] »

pillsburycat wrote: post #25
natpalmer1776 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have evidence for those claims? I don’t mean to be contrary or subversive, I’d just be interested in seeing how this is actually taking place.

To be very precise about session recording: you can inspect the Cursor binary and see that it comes bundled with rrweb and full telemetry infrastructure setup is in place: mouse movements, clicks, scroll positions, etc. on top of the codebase and prompts being sent over the wire. However, I have edited my other claims for now and you can consider them provisionally retracted. My original advice about turning off data…

[deleted]

Re: Improving Composer through real-time RL

#36

Post by addcn »

vicchenai wrote: post #23

the rl loop here is clever but i wonder how the reward signal degrades over time. if you're optimizing for user acceptance of suggestions, you're inevitably training on a mix of "this was actually correct" and "i accepted because editing the suggestion was more work than accepting it." that second case creates a subtle bias toward suggestions that are close-enough-to-not-bother-fixing rather than actually correct. al…

Yeah. Great callout. You basically need signal all the way to production. Did it get nuked during a code review? Is it still running 2 mo later? How many incidents were caused by this code?

This is tough though because enterprises go absolutely ballistic over “training on our data” - which is understandable, but will also hold us back.

Re: Improving Composer through real-time RL

#37

Post by TeMPOraL »

pillsburycat wrote: post #21

Important disclaimer for anyone using Cursor: make sure to disable "data sharing" in your account settings, as it is enabled by default and old accounts are automatically opted into it.

Devil's advocate: why? Why do people need to make sure to disable it?

Is this the "but privacy!111" stance, or the Dog in the Manger stance ("I'm not being paid for it, so why should anyone else benefit?"), or...?

Re: Improving Composer through real-time RL

#38

Post by hrimfaxi »

nickphx wrote: post #32
m13rar wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't though it works and these guys are raking in the money. The wider audience of devs or people paying up for Cursor don't care about the morals old school OSS devs hold.

Define raking in the money. Operating at a profound loss, fueled by untenable investments and hype.. Where are they raking in the money?

Do you think the founders or engineers are poorly compensated?

Re: Improving Composer through real-time RL

#39

Post by simjnd »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #37
pillsburycat wrote: post #21

Important disclaimer for anyone using Cursor: make sure to disable "data sharing" in your account settings, as it is enabled by default and old accounts are automatically opted into it.

Devil's advocate: why? Why do people need to make sure to disable it? Is this the "but privacy!111" stance, or the Dog in the Manger stance ("I'm not being paid for it, so why should anyone else benefit?"), or...?

Also from a security perspective. People have been able to extract copyrighted code / API keys some LLMs have been trained on before. If you opt-in to this, your / your company code will be used to train and improve the model. People may then be able to extract that from the model. Another threat vector.
Post reply on HN