Comment by Veserv
8 hours ago
Okay, so the evidence you are presenting is that the entity pushing intentionally deceptive marketing with a direct conflict of interest said they were not lying.
I am frustrated at people loudly and proudly "releasing" a system they claim works when it does not. They could have pointed at a specific version that worked, but chose not to indicating they are either intentionally deceptive or clueless. Arguing they had no opportunity for nuance and thus had no choice but to make false statements for their own benefit is ethical bankruptcy. If they had no opportunity for nuance, then they could make a statement that errs against their benefit; that is ethical behavior.
See my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=46771405
I do not think Cursor's statements about this project were remotely misleading enough to justify this backlash.
Which of those things would you classify as "false statements"? The use of "from scratch"?
> Arguing they had no opportunity for nuance and thus had no choice but to make false statements for their own benefit is ethical bankruptcy.
absolutely
and clueless managers seeing these headlines will almost certainly lead to people losing their jobs