> then maybe you should go all the way in gaining my trust with whatever safeguards it takes

What kind of safeguards are possible with a web app?

> And Wasabi doesn't change you on egress.

Wasabi only allows as much egress as the amount of data you're storing and I don't think you can even pay for more: https://wasabi.com/pricing/faq#free-egress-policy.

You can put something like cloudflare in front of it fro free.

There's a number of CDNS that participate in zero egress.

Is this Apache licensed or a custom one? The README contains this:

> This project is licensed under the Apache License 2.0 - see the LICENSE file for details.

> This project offers a high-fidelity speech generation model *intended solely for research and educational use*. The following uses are strictly forbidden:

> Identity Misuse: Do not produce audio resembling real individuals without permission.

> ...

Specifically the phrase "intended solely for research and educational use".

Sorry for the confusion. the license is plain Apache 2.0, and we changed the wording to "intended for research and educational use." The point was, users are free to use it for their use cases, just don't do shady stuff with it.

Thanks for the feedback :)

So is that actually part of the license (making it non-Apache 2.0), or not?

not part of the license!

Hmm, the "strictly forbidden" part seems more important than whatever are their stated intentions... Either way, it seems like it needs clarifying.

> Tinfoil hat me says that it was a policy change that they are blaming on an "AI Support Agent" and hoping nobody pokes too much behind the curtain.

Yeah, who puts an AI in charge of support emails with no human checks and no mention that it's an AI generated reply in the response email?

AI companies high on their own supply, that's who. Ultralytics is (in)famous for it.

Why is Ultralytics yolo famous for it?

They had a bot, for a long time, that responded to every github issue in the persona of the founder and tried to solve your problem. It was bad at this, and thus a huge proportion of people who had a question about one of their yolo models received worse-than-useless advice "directly from the CEO," with no disclosure that it was actually a bot.

The bot is now called "UltralyticsAssistant" and discloses that it's automated, which is welcome. The bad advice is all still there though.

(I don't know if they're really _famous_ for this, but among friends and colleagues I have talked to multiple people who independently found and were frustrated by the useless github issues.)

I was hit by this while working on a project for class and it was the most frustrating thing ever. The bot would completely hallucinate functions and docs and it confused everyone. I found one post where someone did the simple prompt injection of "ignore previous instructions and x" and it worked but I think it's delted now. Swore off ultralytics after that.

A forward-thinking company that believes in the power of Innovation™.

These bros are getting high on their own supply. I vibe, I code, but I don't do VibeOps. We aren't ready.

VibeSupport bots, how well did that work out for Canada Air?

https://thehill.com/business/4476307-air-canada-must-pay-ref...

"Vibe coding" is the cringiest term I've heard in tech in... maybe ever? I'm can't believe it's something that's caught on. I'm old, I guess, but jeez.

How is fabrication different than hallucination? Perhaps you could also call it synthesis, but in this context, all three sound like synonyms to me. What's the material difference?

Hallucination is a byproduct of mental disruption or disorder. Fabrication is "I don't know, so I'll make something up."

> but I don't do VibeOps.

I believe it’s pronounced VibeOops.

I believe it's pronounced "Vulnerabilities As A Service".

"It's evolving, but backwards."

An AI company dogfooding their own marketing. It's almost admirable in a way.

I worry that they don't understand the limitations of their own product.

The market will teach them. Problem solved.

Not specifically about Cursor, but no. The market gave us big tech oligarchy and enshittification. I'm starting to believe the market tends to reward the shittiest players out there.

This is the future AI companies are selling. I believe they would 100%.

I worry that the tally of those who do is much higher than is prudent.

A lot of company actually, although 100% automation is still rare.

100% for first line support is very common. It was common years ago before ChatGPT and ChatGPT made it so much better than before.

OpenAI seems to do this. I've gotten complete nonsense replies from their support for billing questions.

Is this sarcasm? AI has been getting used to handle support requests for years without human checks. Why would they suddenly start adding human checks when the tech is way better than it was years ago?

AI may have been used to pick from a repertoire of stock responses, but not to generate (hallucinate) responses. Thus you may have gotten a response that fails to address your request, but not a response with false information.

I'm confused. What is your point here? It reads like you're trying to contradict me however you appear to be confirming what I said.

You asked why they would start adding human checks with the “way better” tech. That tech gives false information where the previous tech didn’t, therefore requiring human checks.

Same reason they would have added checks all along. They care whether the information is correct.

These companies that can barely keep the support documentation URLs working nevermind keeping the content of their documentation up to date suddenly care about the info being correct? Have you ever dealt with customer support professionally or are you just writing what you want to be true regardless of any information to back it up?

I'm not saying that they care. I'm saying that if they introduce some human oversight to the support process, one of the reasons would probably be that they care about correctness. That would, as you indicate, represent a change. But sometimes things change. I'm not predicting a change.

But then again history shows already they _don't_ care.

It does say it's AI generated. This is the signature line:

    Sam
    Cursor AI Support Assistant
    cursor.com • hi@cursor.com • forum.cursor.com

Clearer would have been: "AI controlled support assistant of Cursor".

True. And maybe they added that to the signature later anyway. But OP in the reddit thread did seem aware it was an AI agent.

OP in Reddit thread posted screenshot and it is not labeled as AI: https://old.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1jyy5am/psa_cursor_...

Thanks. They must have added it after, I only tried it just before I pasted my result here.

A more honest tagline

"Caution: Any of this could be wrong."

Then again paying users might wonder "what exactly am I paying for then?"

WordPress.com launches would be a better title. This builder is not available in WordPress (the open source software) but only WordPress.com (a hosting company owned by the creator of WordPress).

For a moment I thought they added AI integration to the open source Gutenberg plugin.

A very important distinction indeed. Wordpress.COM is not the same as the self-hosted version at WordPress.ORG

While they've made recent changes to .COM to bring it closer to .ORG mostly as a knee-jerk response to the Matt v WPE scrap, they are still very different experiences.

I rarely advise clients looking to DIY solution to go to WordPress.com

Since wordpress.com is displayed next to the title above, we can fix this by reverting the submission title to that of the article. I've done that now. (Well, I used the minimally baity substring.)

(Submitted title was "WordPress launches new free AI website builder")

It's funny that the whole lawsuit thing started because Mullenweg was claiming wpengine was confusing customers, when .com and .org is way more confusing.

I keep them straight usually. However, I don't have to. I just use Classic press.

Very true! Oh and I would hope not.

The founder of Gumroad is claiming that [1].

> 14 years ago, Gumroad launched

> Today, Gumroad goes open-source

[1]: https://x.com/shl/status/1908090697984426227

Thanks, this is new to me and not something I could infer from OP's link.

I think the original title for this submission also called it open source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43580533

Yes indeed, but OP is not Gumroad.

It's risky if you have any chance of ever crossing $1M in company revenue because the license will terminate as soon as you reach that and you'll have to rewrite everything.

> The licensor grants you a copyright license for the software to do everything you might do with the software that would otherwise infringe the licensor's copyright, but only as long as you meet all the conditions below.

> You may use the software under this license only if (1) your company has less than 1 million USD (2024) total revenue in the prior tax year, and less than 10 million USD (2024) GMV (Gross Merchandise Value), or (2) you are a non-profit organization or government entity.

To be fair, getting a platform for free that can potentially bring you to $1M is a very good deal, I'm quite sure you ll figure out a strategy before you get to $1M, and perhaps even get a good deal on the license from them. However I do think they should've been more upfront about the licensing.

1M revenue isn't that high a bar to clear in retail, just takes one popular/meme product. After all the COGS/fixed costs are tallied up, that could leave you with significantly less with which to contemplate custom development or platform changes.

I'm sure if you're lucky to get near 1 million in revenue you can reach out and pay for a license.

You are not required to rewrite everything if you exceed $1million in annual revenue. You are required to get a commercial license from them, which costs money.

That's not the same thing. And quite frankly, if you're making over $1 million in annual revenue you should be able to afford the license fee for the most important part of your company.

There's no guarantee that a commercial license will be available at a reasonable fee, or available at all. You'll have nothing to negotiate with because the alternative is to rewrite or shut down immediately.

Isn't that true of anything?

At renewal software provider X might hike license fees for Y to an unreasonable fee, or decide you're not worth the time at all.

I assume you can get a commercial license at any point, not only after you reach X revenue too?

It's true for proprietary software yes. The title of this post was "Gumroad is open source" (which has now been fixed).

It would be a bad idea to read any of this code if you're working on a competitor based on the license terms.

I would say the risk of a lawsuit is infinitessimal.

And at that point they can ask for anything because the alternative would be rewriting all your code.

Reproducing the whole benchmark would be expensive, OmniAi starts at $250/month.

Generally running the whole benchmark is ~$200, since all the providers cost money. But if anyone wants to specifically benchmark Omni just drop us a note and we'll make the credits available.

So not all of them are local and open source? Ugh.

I don't see why you couldn't run any of those locally if you buy the right hardware?

I haven't checked myself, so I'm not sure, others might be able to provide the answer though.

If they (all of the mentioned ones) are open source and can be ran locally, then most likely, yes.

From what I remember, they are all local and open source, so the answer is yes, if I am correct.

Mistral ocr is closed source

Thanks!