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.
Reminds me of SAAP/Salesforce.
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.
> 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".
It's just an odd comparison to begin with. You said
> 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
I don't think you have to be good at Ableton at all to make good music. I don't think you can even argue it would benefit your music to learn Ableton. There's a crap ton of people who are wizards with their DAW making mediocre music. A DAW can be fun to learn, and that can help me keep my flow state. But it's not literally going to make better music, and the fundamentals of production don't change at all from DAW to DAW.
That's a totally separate thing from LLMs. We are constantly told that if we learn the magic way to use LLMs, we can spit out functioning code a lot faster. But in reality, people are just generating code faster than they can verify it.