41–50 of 169 posts
I use Cursor because I found their autocomplete to be the best option at the time. That seemed to be the consensus at one point too from bits of research I did. Do people think there are better autocomplete options available now? Is it a case of just using a particular model for autocomplete in whatever IDE you want to use?
I really don't understand Cursor's 30 billion dollars valuation (half of Antropic). I use it, it's not a bad tool by any means but it's so buggy from version to version. Latest bug I had, it completely stopped keeping my zsh state in the terminal, I had to downgrade. And honestly, I'm not that sure what secret sauce is worth 30 billion dollars? The agent loop? Others can do that? The autocomplete?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look, I use AI regularly. I value AI. It's not a criticism of AI, broadly, it's commentary on a feature designed to make engineers (and increasingly non-engineers) even lazier about one of the main points of leverage in making AI useful.
Autocomplete is one of Cursor's most popular features, and is cited as the only reason some people continue to use it. And you're mocking the Cursor team for adding it to the one place where devs still type a lot of text, and making a value judgment by calling it lazy.
Because that's where the text the devs type still matters most.
Do I care significantly about this feature's existence, and find it an affront to humanity? No.
But, people who find themselves using auto-complete to make even their prompts for them will absolutely be disintermediated, so I think it wise to ensure people understand that by making funny jokes about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look, I use AI regularly. I value AI. It's not a criticism of AI, broadly, it's commentary on a feature designed to make engineers (and increasingly non-engineers) even lazier about one of the main points of leverage in making AI useful.
Autocomplete is one of Cursor's most popular features, and is cited as the only reason some people continue to use it. And you're mocking the Cursor team for adding it to the one place where devs still type a lot of text, and making a value judgment by calling it lazy.
Anyone seriously using these tools knows that context engineering and detailed specific prompting is the way to be effective with agent coding.
Just take it to the extreme and youll see; what if you auto complete from a single word? A single character?
The system youre using is increasingly generating some random output instead of what you were either a) trying to do, or b) told to do.
Its funny because its like, “How can we make vibe coding even worse?”
“…I know, lets just generate random code from random prompts”
There have been multiple recent posts about how to direct agents using a combination of planning step, context summary/packing, etc to craft detailed prompts that agents can effectively action on large code bases.
…or yeah, just hit tab and go make a coffee. Yolo.
This could have been a killer feature about using a research step to enhance a user prompt and turn it into a super prompt; but it isnt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Autocomplete is one of Cursor's most popular features, and is cited as the only reason some people continue to use it. And you're mocking the Cursor team for adding it to the one place where devs still type a lot of text, and making a value judgment by calling it lazy.
> adding it to the one place where devs still type a lot of text Because that's where the text the devs type still matters most. Do I care significantly about this feature's existence, and find it an affront to humanity? No. But, people who find themselves using auto-complete to make even their prompts for them will absolutely be disintermediated, so I think it wise to ensure people understand that by making funny jo…
Why waste precious milliseconds typing complete sentences to your AI coding assistant? With autocomplete in the prompt box, we've solved the most pressing problem facing developers today: prompt fatigue. Gone are the days of exhausting yourself by typing full requests like "refactor this function to use async/await." Now, simply type "refac—" and let our AI predict that you want an AI to refactor your code. It's AI a…
This brings up an interesting point that's often missed, IMO. LLMs are one of the few things that work on many layers, such that once you have a layer that works, you can always add another abstraction layer on top. So yes, you could very well have a prompt that "builds prompts" that "builds prompts" that ... So something like "do x with best practices in mind" can turn into something pretty complex and "correct" down the line of a few prompt loops.
Why waste precious milliseconds typing complete sentences to your AI coding assistant? With autocomplete in the prompt box, we've solved the most pressing problem facing developers today: prompt fatigue. Gone are the days of exhausting yourself by typing full requests like "refactor this function to use async/await." Now, simply type "refac—" and let our AI predict that you want an AI to refactor your code. It's AI a…