zlacker

>>embedd+(OP)
Key phrase "They never actually claim this browser is working and functional " This is what most AI "successes" turn out to be when you apply even a modicum of scrutiny.

>>josefr+lq
In my personal experience, Codex and Claude Code are definitively capable tools when used in certain ways.

What Cursor did with their blogpost seems intentionally and outright misleading, since I'm not able to even run the thing. With Codex/Claude Codex it's relatively easy to download it and run it to try for yourself.

>>embedd+ws
"definitively capable tools when used in certain ways". This sounds like "if it doesn't work for you is because you don't use in the right way" imo.

Reminds me of SAAP/Salesforce.

>>netdev+gw
Yes, many tools work like that, especially professional tools.

You think you can just fire up Ableton, Cubase or whatever and make as great music as a artist who done that for a long time? No, it requires practice and understanding. Every tool works like this, some different difficulties, some different skill levels, but all of them have it in some way.

>>embedd+Ax
Not even the Ableton marketing team is telling me I can just fire up Ableton and make great music and if I can't do that I must be a brainwashed doomer.

>>immibi+3A
The argument isn't what OpenAI/Anthropic are selling their users, what I said was:

> are definitively capable tools when used in certain ways

Which I received pushback on. My reply is to that pushback, defending what I said, not what others told you.

Edit: Besides the point, but Ableton (and others) constantly tell people how to learn how to use the tool, so they use it the right way. There is a whole industry of people (teachers) who specialize in specific software/hardware and teaching others "how to hold the tool correctly".