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

OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 712 posts

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#691

Post by neilv »

Maxious wrote: post #690
taspeotis wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they acquire a company they might need approval due to anti-trust. If the people instead just quit their jobs and start working at Google … nothing to see here.

https://medium.com/@villispeaks/the-blitzhire-acquisition-e3... explores this some more. The remaining employees need to make it look like the business is still viable

Thanks, that's a great article.

I wonder whether the left-behind small-fry employees make out comparably to how they would with an IPO or big acquisition.

Or if the deal is more like: "We'll pay you double what you could make elsewhere for the 2 years we want you to Potemkin Village, or you can walk and get paid zero; we don't care, because enough people will stay."

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#692

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

tsimionescu wrote: post #590
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider also that VC funds often have pension funds as their limited partners. Workers have a claim to their pension, and thus a claim to the startup returns that the VC invests in. So yeah it basically comes down to your definition of "worker-owned". What fraction of worker ownership is necessary? Do C-level execs count as workers? Can it be "worker-owned" if the "workers" are people working elsewhere? Beyond the "…

> Supposing there was an SV startup that was relatively generous with equity compensation, so over 50% of equity is owned by non-C-level employees. What would you expect to change, if anything, if that threshold was passed? If the workers are majority owners, then they can, for example, fire a CEO that is leading the company in the wrong direction, or trying to cut their salaries, or anything like that.

>If the workers are majority owners, then they can, for example, fire a CEO that is leading the company in the wrong direction, or trying to cut their salaries, or anything like that.

Why wouldn't the board fire said CEO?

The most common reason to cut salaries is if the company is in dire financial straits regardless. Co-ops are more likely to cut salary and less likely to do layoffs.

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#693

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

skinnymuch wrote: post #657
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider also that VC funds often have pension funds as their limited partners. Workers have a claim to their pension, and thus a claim to the startup returns that the VC invests in. So yeah it basically comes down to your definition of "worker-owned". What fraction of worker ownership is necessary? Do C-level execs count as workers? Can it be "worker-owned" if the "workers" are people working elsewhere? Beyond the "…

It’s not “your definition”. Worker owned means the workers own the means of production. What you’re talking about is not that at all. What changes is democracy in the work place. You are confusing owning minority equity with what actual control gives you —- actual ownership of capital/MoP/assets/profits

How specifically would you expect a typical SV corp's policies to change if employee equity passes from 49% to 51%?

Remember, if employees own 49%, if they can persuade just 2% of the other shareholders that a change will be positive for the business, they can make that change. So minority vs majority is not as significant as it may seem.

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#694

Post by tsimionescu »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #692
tsimionescu wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Supposing there was an SV startup that was relatively generous with equity compensation, so over 50% of equity is owned by non-C-level employees. What would you expect to change, if anything, if that threshold was passed? If the workers are majority owners, then they can, for example, fire a CEO that is leading the company in the wrong direction, or trying to cut their salaries, or anything like that.

>If the workers are majority owners, then they can, for example, fire a CEO that is leading the company in the wrong direction, or trying to cut their salaries, or anything like that. Why wouldn't the board fire said CEO? The most common reason to cut salaries is if the company is in dire financial straits regardless. Co-ops are more likely to cut salary and less likely to do layoffs.

Because the board doesn't understand the business at the level that employees do. Or because the board has different goals for the business than employees do. Or because the board is filled with friends of the CEO who let them do whatever.

Also, lots of companies reduce salaries or headcount if they feel they can get away with it. They don't need to be in dire financial straights, it's enough to have a few quarters of no or low growth and to want to show a positive change.

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#695

Post by hedayet »

TiredOfLife wrote: post #430
hedayet wrote: post #391

I was so surprised (or shocked) to hear that Windsurf was getting acquired for 3 billion dollars, I made an HN post asking about the truth of that news - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43933825 . HN's system didn't like my tone I guess and removed it, lol. But in any case, I just can't see how AI code editors like Windsurf or Cursor, without any proprietary model, can be valued at billions. What's the underlyin…

They both have proprietary models.

Anyone can build a proprietary model in under a week; but the point is - Cursor and Windsurf don't have proprietary models that remove dependency on external models, and/or have capabilities that competitors don't have.

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#696

Post by hedayet »

scotty79 wrote: post #653
hedayet wrote: post #391

I was so surprised (or shocked) to hear that Windsurf was getting acquired for 3 billion dollars, I made an HN post asking about the truth of that news - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43933825 . HN's system didn't like my tone I guess and removed it, lol. But in any case, I just can't see how AI code editors like Windsurf or Cursor, without any proprietary model, can be valued at billions. What's the underlyin…

> I just can't see how AI code editors like Windsurf or Cursor, without any proprietary model, can be valued at billions. Windsurf used to be GPU rental company before they decided to make a text editor. I imagine they own a lot of silicon they are running their coding assistant on. https://www.afp.com/en/infos/windsurf-launches-first-gpu-clu... It's not a rinky-dinky startup that just forked VS Code in a month.

you meant Exafunction? Nothing of Exafunction was discussed in OpenAI or Google deals.

Windsurf did start as a rinky-dinky starup, just as a plugin (Codeium). And in its current state, it still has no moat.

The only reason big tech leaders are throwing money at this is - they need to show they are doing something to stay ahead. And right now they are going on a hiring frenzy as a show for their investors.

I have been there when shopping businesses were being bought for billions of dollars, and then they all got bundled up into a mess swapped under the rug silently. I don't think this is going to be any different.

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#697

Post by saagarjha »

submeta wrote: post #682
saagarjha wrote: post #680

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iTerm is also GPU accelerated.

Configuration in XML, instead of YAML or TOML, it feels bloated, compared to Ghostty.

It's plist, that's what Mac apps are going to use

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#698

Post by scotty79 »

hedayet wrote: post #696
scotty79 wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just can't see how AI code editors like Windsurf or Cursor, without any proprietary model, can be valued at billions. Windsurf used to be GPU rental company before they decided to make a text editor. I imagine they own a lot of silicon they are running their coding assistant on. https://www.afp.com/en/infos/windsurf-launches-first-gpu-clu... It's not a rinky-dinky startup that just forked VS Code in a month.

you meant Exafunction? Nothing of Exafunction was discussed in OpenAI or Google deals. Windsurf did start as a rinky-dinky starup, just as a plugin (Codeium). And in its current state, it still has no moat. The only reason big tech leaders are throwing money at this is - they need to show they are doing something to stay ahead. And right now they are going on a hiring frenzy as a show for their investors. I have been…

Codium was built on Exafunction infrastructure.

https://www.unite.ai/varun-mohan-co-founder-ceo-of-codeium-i...

It's really a simple story, they built infrastructure years ago, initially they rented it, so companies outsourced their computing tasks to them. But eventually came up with the idea what product could they put on top of their infrastructure to sell it for dollars rather than pennies. And they did.

They don't need a moat because they provide turnkey utility to a lot of very rich corporations. They are not in the business of selling the vs plug-in to you. They are in the business of selling developer experience powered by their own vast compute to a lot of very rich corporations.

They had millions in revenue before they hired their first sales rep. I don't think just a VS plug-in startup could do that.

https://www.saastr.com/cro-confidential-how-codium-built-a-b...

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#699

Post by redhale »

ghc wrote: post #581
redhale wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cursor's multi-file tab completion and multi-file diff experience are worth $20 easily IMO. I truly do not understand people's affinity for a CLI interface for coding agents. Scriptability I understand, but surely we could agree that CC with Cursor's UX would be superior to CC's terminal alone, right? That's why CC is pushing IDE integration -- they're just not there yet.

> surely we could agree that CC with Cursor's UX I can't stand the UX, or VS Code's UX in general. I vastly prefer having CC open in a terminal alongside neovim. CC is fully capable of opening diffs in neovim or otherwise completely controlling neovim by talking to its socket.

Fair enough. I guess a better way to put it is: for people who like Cursor's UX, but prefer Claude Code's performance as an agent, the combination of both would be the true killer app. Having to choose between these feels like a temporary gap in the evolution of these tools, and I'm ready for us to get past it.

Re: OpenAI’s Windsurf deal is off, and Windsurf’s CEO is going to Google

#700

Post by oblio »

Abishek_Muthian wrote: post #652
oblio wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of hardware are you using?

I use a laptop with 4090 16GB VRAM, core i9 and 96GB RAM for low latency work and Mac mini M4 for tasks which doesn’t require low latency. I had written a blog on how I run LLM locally a while back[1] I’ll update the information on models & Mac mini soon. [1] https://abishekmuthian.com/how-i-run-llms-locally/

Have you tried to hook up your local setup to Cline/Roo or similar stuff?
Post reply on HN