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

Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

cursor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 238 posts

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#61

Post by NitpickLawyer »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #36
alach11 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't a large user base and the data collected from those users a moat of sorts?

Honestly the data itself is probably worth heaps even in the company itself collapses. Early attention engineering when humans were still in the loop!!!

> Early attention engineering when humans were still in the loop

Exactly. Cursor was the first product used by tons of devs on real codebases. Just the signal "acceptance rate" is huge and can't be easily captured w/ synthetic data.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#62

Post by goyozi »

I kind of want to try it, to see if and how far they can take an open model and improve it but I really don’t miss the Cursor user experience. Constant UI changes, half-baked features, smaller and smaller limits, useless AI change attribution; I think I’ll wait for others to report if it’s any good.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#63

Post by DonHopkins »

wilg wrote: post #52
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A moat is when you have something other's can't easily get. Every MAG 7 / FAANG company already has more users and more data... That's not a moat. That's traction.

That's not X. That's Y.

[flagged]

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#65

Post by 3836293648 »

jjice wrote: post #6
jdlyga wrote: post #5

It's a bit odd that they're not comparing it against Sonnet

I don't think so. They're comparing it to the highest tier available models from Anthropic and OpenAI. Generally speaking, Opus is better than Sonnet in almost every way, so why have the redundancy?

Price to performance?

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#66

Post by the_duke »

asar wrote: post #2

The model is (like Composer 2) based on Kimi K2.5 and they claim SOTA performance for 1/10th of the cost. The tweet also mentions that they've started a new model from scratch on Colossus 2 (xAI/SpaceX Cluster). Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago.

In my opinion cursor actually has one of the best harnesses again at the moment.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#67

Post by mrklol »

m_mueller wrote: post #58

It's a bit confusing to me why they'd make this 'fast' version the default, as it appears to be much more expensive than Composer 2. Wasn't it supposed to be a very cheap alternative to SOTA models?

Isn’t it a really cheap alternative to sota models (according to benchmarks)?

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#69

Post by smallnamespace »

memoryleakgame wrote: post #33

If these benches from their site hold up (they likely wont) Wouldn't this compress ai revenue like 15x quickly If they really have a 4.7 opus high equivalent at 1/16 the cost wouldn't this significantly effect all the current capex and planing Maybe they are getting elon to cover cost

AI revenue has been going up while the cost per token has been rapidly falling. The Jevons paradox applies here. The cheaper software is, the more software is written. There is not a finite demand for software.

Re: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5

#70

Post by make3 »

asar wrote: post #2

The model is (like Composer 2) based on Kimi K2.5 and they claim SOTA performance for 1/10th of the cost. The tweet also mentions that they've started a new model from scratch on Colossus 2 (xAI/SpaceX Cluster). Really impressive how they've made this jump from being called the vscode fork with no moat just a couple of months ago.

why is that part impressive specifically? they got purchased by SpaceX, they have access to infinite compute and cash now.

& now they're still losing all of their users to Claude Code and Codex.

Post reply on HN