6 ms·

Calling it an IDE is under-representing cursor They have in-house models, and the data to train even more powerful ones. The cursor team is a proper AI lab.

by frde_me 3mo ago

tomrod 3mo ago
Meh. On an outcomes analysis, I've found Cursor's delivery to be exceptionally weak. Good luck to the alt-economy of SpaceTesla though, may all our 401ks survive.
airstrike 3mo ago
Isn't their in-house model just Kimi?
- frde_me 3mo ago
  See here https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 85% of the compute for the final model is from them, and not the base Kimi model.
  - airstrike 3mo ago
    That just means it cost a lot. Does it perform meaningfully better than the Kimi model given all that extra compute? And proportionally to the amount spent?
    - frde_me 3mo ago
      That's something for us and benchmarks to decide However it definitly isn't _just_ Kimi. The weight will be different after that 85% of extra training on top of the base model. If those different weights are better are worse doesn't change that it's in most meaningful ways not the same as the base one. I would encourage you to lookup their blog posts about their post training process if you want a bit more faith that they aren't running an extra 85% of compute and burning money with no-ops.
      - airstrike 3mo ago
        "Just Kimi" is hyperbole, to be clear. I don't think it's all no-ops. Still don't think it's a particularly relevant model/company/product. I'll defer the reading until I see signal that they have something worthwhile. I've watched a couple interviews and used the product, neither of which impressed me.
        msdz 3mo ago
        You don't think that a $60b valuation is having something worthwhile? (Only half-joking…)
    - jauntywundrkind 3mo ago
      Cursor's Composer 2.5 is one of the few models out there focusing on coding, which is the one thing most of us here want. It's pretty good! It's not near frontier level insight generating genius, but it's regarded as very capable and trustable, and is indeed a lot better than previous Kimi. It'll be interesting to compare it versus Kimi 2.7 Code, which just dropped, which is also notably a coding specifical model. I'm expecting we'll see more of this over time and I think it has huge rewards, and Composer 2.5 is early proof. I'm not super concerned about the spend to train the model, especially given that Kimi was famously incredibly cheaply made, and given what they are competing with. I don't think that's a meaningful concern. Reciprocally, and in far more important relevant in my humble opinion: in terms of cost to run models: Composer 2.5 is easily one of the cheapest models out there. It's fantastically cheap. It's token efficiency is through the roof astronomical. I think this training for a coding specific model has yielded something incredibly special here, and I hope SpaceXLAIC isn't the only company doing this.
oompydoompy74 3mo ago
Their “in house models” are reportedly basically just Kimi.
- frde_me 3mo ago
  Replied on the other comment about this, but putting it here: > See here https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 > 85% of the compute for the final model is from them, and not the base Kimi model. Of course they could be lying, but it seems feasible that they are adding a lot on top of this
CamperBob2 3mo ago
They use Kimi and post-train it on the same stuff that anyone with a Github dump can feed it. They aren't doing anything that you can't do yourself.
- redox99 3mo ago
  Dumping github into a model is not post training, thats pre training. And every base model already has all of github. Composer post training is clearly very good, only second to Anthropic and OpenAI. It does irk me a bit that they try to hide the fact that it's based on a chinese pretrained model though.
- whimsicalism 3mo ago
  why comment on something you clearly don't know anything about? it's on-policy RL trained not just on coding text listen and learn :)
stymaar 3mo ago
> Calling it an IDE is under-representing cursor On the contrary, it's over selling it: it's a not even a stand-alone IDE (like Zed, for instance) it's a mere fork of VSCode.
- sebzim4500 3mo ago
  In the same sense that chrome is just a safari fork I suppose
  - stymaar 3mo ago
    Safari isn't even open source, and Chrome has never been a fork of Safari. But yes Blink definitely started as a Webkit fork, and everyone would have found that laughable if someone bought that a proprietary fork of Webkit for $60B.

Calling it an IDE is under-representing cursor They have in-house models, and the data to train even more powerful ones. The cursor team is a proper AI lab.

by frde_me 3mo ago

Calling it an IDE is under-representing cursor They have in-house models, and the data to train even more powerful ones. The cursor team is a proper AI lab.

tomrod 3mo ago

Meh. On an outcomes analysis, I've found Cursor's delivery to be exceptionally weak. Good luck to the alt-economy of SpaceTesla though, may all our 401ks survive.

airstrike 3mo ago

Isn't their in-house model just Kimi?

frde_me 3mo ago
See here https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 85% of the compute for the final model is from them, and not the base Kimi model.
- airstrike 3mo ago
  That just means it cost a lot. Does it perform meaningfully better than the Kimi model given all that extra compute? And proportionally to the amount spent?
  - frde_me 3mo ago
    That's something for us and benchmarks to decide However it definitly isn't _just_ Kimi. The weight will be different after that 85% of extra training on top of the base model. If those different weights are better are worse doesn't change that it's in most meaningful ways not the same as the base one. I would encourage you to lookup their blog posts about their post training process if you want a bit more faith that they aren't running an extra 85% of compute and burning money with no-ops.
    - airstrike 3mo ago
      "Just Kimi" is hyperbole, to be clear. I don't think it's all no-ops. Still don't think it's a particularly relevant model/company/product. I'll defer the reading until I see signal that they have something worthwhile. I've watched a couple interviews and used the product, neither of which impressed me.
      - msdz 3mo ago
        You don't think that a $60b valuation is having something worthwhile? (Only half-joking…)
  - jauntywundrkind 3mo ago
    Cursor's Composer 2.5 is one of the few models out there focusing on coding, which is the one thing most of us here want. It's pretty good! It's not near frontier level insight generating genius, but it's regarded as very capable and trustable, and is indeed a lot better than previous Kimi. It'll be interesting to compare it versus Kimi 2.7 Code, which just dropped, which is also notably a coding specifical model. I'm expecting we'll see more of this over time and I think it has huge rewards, and Composer 2.5 is early proof. I'm not super concerned about the spend to train the model, especially given that Kimi was famously incredibly cheaply made, and given what they are competing with. I don't think that's a meaningful concern. Reciprocally, and in far more important relevant in my humble opinion: in terms of cost to run models: Composer 2.5 is easily one of the cheapest models out there. It's fantastically cheap. It's token efficiency is through the roof astronomical. I think this training for a coding specific model has yielded something incredibly special here, and I hope SpaceXLAIC isn't the only company doing this.

oompydoompy74 3mo ago

Their “in house models” are reportedly basically just Kimi.

frde_me 3mo ago
Replied on the other comment about this, but putting it here: > See here https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5 > 85% of the compute for the final model is from them, and not the base Kimi model. Of course they could be lying, but it seems feasible that they are adding a lot on top of this

CamperBob2 3mo ago

They use Kimi and post-train it on the same stuff that anyone with a Github dump can feed it. They aren't doing anything that you can't do yourself.

redox99 3mo ago
Dumping github into a model is not post training, thats pre training. And every base model already has all of github. Composer post training is clearly very good, only second to Anthropic and OpenAI. It does irk me a bit that they try to hide the fact that it's based on a chinese pretrained model though.
whimsicalism 3mo ago
why comment on something you clearly don't know anything about? it's on-policy RL trained not just on coding text listen and learn :)

stymaar 3mo ago

> Calling it an IDE is under-representing cursor On the contrary, it's over selling it: it's a not even a stand-alone IDE (like Zed, for instance) it's a mere fork of VSCode.

sebzim4500 3mo ago
In the same sense that chrome is just a safari fork I suppose
- stymaar 3mo ago
  Safari isn't even open source, and Chrome has never been a fork of Safari. But yes Blink definitely started as a Webkit fork, and everyone would have found that laughable if someone bought that a proprietary fork of Webkit for $60B.