zlacker

[return to "Cursor's latest “browser experiment” implied success without evidence"]
1. emp173+qw[view] [source] 2026-01-16 17:06:17
>>embedd+(OP)
This is why AI skeptics exist. We’re now at the point where you can make entirely unsubstantiated claims about AI capability, and even many folks on HN will accept it with a complete lack of discernment. The hype is out of control.
◧◩
2. embedd+4x[view] [source] 2026-01-16 17:09:06
>>emp173+qw
> folks on HN will accept it with a complete lack of discernment

Well, I'm a heavy LLM user, I "believe" LLM helps me a lot for some tasks, but I'm also a developer with decades of experience, so I'm not gonna claim it'll help non-programmers to build software, or whatever. They're tools, not solutions in themselves.

But even us "folks on HN" who generally keep up with where the ecosystem is going, have a limit I suppose. You need to substantiate what you're saying, and if you're saying you've managed to create a browser, better let others verify that somehow.

◧◩◪
3. emp173+Cx[view] [source] 2026-01-16 17:11:44
>>embedd+4x
Take a look at this thread regarding the original claim: >>46624541

The top comment is indeed baseless hype without a hint of skepticism.

◧◩◪◨
4. simonw+u31[view] [source] 2026-01-16 19:20:11
>>emp173+Cx
As usual, I was careful with my words:

> This project from Cursor is the second attempt I've seen at this now!

I used the word "attempt" very deliberately, to avoid suggesting that either of these two projects had achieved the goal.

I don't see how you can get to "baseless hype without a hint of skepticism" there unless you've already decided to take anything I say in bad faith.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. habine+rq2[view] [source] 2026-01-17 07:44:15
>>simonw+u31
C'mon. Your comment starts with you hyping your own prediction and crowing, "See, it's coming true!"

"But I didn't say this exact word!" and then accusing the other person of bad faith is some textbook DARVO.

[go to top]