zlacker

[return to "Cursor's latest “browser experiment” implied success without evidence"]
1. Pinus+uK[view] [source] 2026-01-16 18:06:53
>>embedd+(OP)
I haven’t studied the project that this is a comment on, but: The article notices that something that compiles, runs, and renders a trivial HTML page might be a good starting point, and I would certainly agree with that when it’s humans writing the code. But is it the only way? Instead of maintaining “builds and runs” as a constant and varying what it does, can it make sense to have “a decent-sized subset of browser functionality” as a constant and varying the “builds and runs” bit? (Admittedly, that bit does not seem to be converging here, but I’m curious in more general terms.)
◧◩
2. rsynno+Yr2[view] [source] 2026-01-17 08:10:41
>>Pinus+uK
> an it make sense to have “a decent-sized subset of browser functionality” as a constant and varying the “builds and runs” bit?

I mean by definition something that doesn't build and run doesn't have any browser-like functionality at all.

[go to top]