Skip to main content
Cursor SignalsBack to the read

Every source behind the read

Every source GILD analyzed, newest first. Each says who the source is, how it knows, whether it still applies and which findings it counts toward. Open a count to see only its sources.

Whose sources count

Source

94 sources in Engineering leaders and teams, with product documentation Showing all 183 sources

  1. Positive

    Anamon, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXHacker News comment

    Their employer trialed every major provider for a month each and Cursor won the team vote almost unanimously; the commenter calls it the best LLM IDE by a wide margin.

    Published Aug 31, 2026self-described: Employer trialed every major provider, then voted

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-08-31
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  2. Positive

    fy20, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXHacker News comment

    Their team relies on Cursor's cloud agents to run automated investigations of support issues, alarms and feature requests, while finding the editor fairly ordinary.

    Published Aug 29, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-08-29
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  3. Mixed

    zxspectrum1982, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXHacker News comment

    Loves Cursor at work, but since the Cursor Token Rate their company tells developers to use Claude and Codex directly, so the commenter uses Cursor-native Grok models almost exclusively.

    Published Aug 29, 2026self-described: Company moved devs from Cursor to Claude and Codex direct

    not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-08-29, Grok 4.6 and Sonnet
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, continuity: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Grok 4.6, Sonnet

  4. Mixed

    Yaroslav (Yarik), tech lead for the coding-agent rollout, Superhuman

    How Superhuman Scaled AI Coding Agents Across Their Entire Eng OrgConference talk video

    At Superhuman, Cursor let a backend engineer build front ends after Copilot's autocomplete, and the team later moved its agent work to Claude Code.

    "And then Cursor came out and I I said as I said I'm backend engineer, but suddenly I could do a front end."
    Transcript excerpt, Yaroslav (Yarik) (automatic captions), at 3:05

    Published Aug 18, 2026self-described: Superhuman, formerly Grammarly, engineering organization

    Not counted

    Superhuman took part in an early Claude Code beta that Anthropic offered it. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  5. Mixed

    tdu01, Hacker News commenter who leads a team

    Comment on: Show HN: How well do you use Claude Code?Hacker News comment

    Their team is very productive with Cursor using different models per task, but senior engineers cannot keep up reviewing the volume, and the commenter worries about pace versus quality.

    Published Jul 25, 2026self-described: Leads a team of senior engineers on Cursor

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-07-25
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  6. Negative

    Jovan (jovanvel), early Cursor power user who brought colleagues onto Cursor

    Reply in: Legacy Individual Plan, Max Mode RequiredCursor forum post

    An early power user who brought over 30 colleagues onto Cursor calls the mid-subscription Max Mode requirement on legacy plans a betrayal of the terms the poster renewed under.

    Published Jul 7, 2026self-described: Brought over 30 people, mostly from their company, onto Cursor

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on GLM 5.2
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-07-07, GLM 5.2
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Legacy request-based individual plan

  7. No opinion stated

    Michael Redding, Principal Product Manager, presenting with Jeff Davis, VP of Core Infrastructure at Indeed

    2x the power users: How structured AI training scaled developer productivityConference session recording, DX Annual (Engineering Enablement podcast)

    Indeed's AI coding tool usage reached about 97% of engineers, mostly on Claude Code with a little Cursor, some Windsurf and some Amp.

    "…we’re all the way up to around 97%. And if you’re interested, our breakdown rate, we’re mostly Claude Code, a little bit Cursor, some Windsurf, and then down at the bottom, Amp."
    Excerpt, Michael Redding

    Published Jun 29, 2026Indeed engineering, more than 2,000 engineers

    Practitioner account; ran the rollout; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-29
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current

  8. No opinion stated

    Abhishek Tibrewal, Uber, presenting with Ty Smith at DX Annual

    Uber's journey of measuring AI impact on developer productivityConference session recording, Engineering Enablement podcast (DX)

    Says Uber's adoption data showed its iOS developers were not picking up AI tools because Xcode lagged in AI capabilities, so Uber reprioritized Swift LSP work and made Cursor available to them.

    "…the IS developers were not picking up these tools, and so we figured out the X code was lagging behind in AI capabilities. And so we reprioritized our efforts in Swift LSP and made Cursor available to them. Adoption data told us exactly…"
    Excerpt, Abhishek Tibrewal

    Published Jun 22, 2026self-described: Uber engineering organization

    Practitioner account; ran the rollout; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-22
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current

  9. Negative

    esalman, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Their 20,000-employee company decided not to renew Cursor; the commenter had already returned to VS Code after the agent-first Cursor 3 update.

    Published Jun 17, 2026self-described: 20,000-employee company with a tech footprint

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on V3
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-17, V3
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, continuity: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  10. Mixed

    sanex, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Their whole team used Cursor for months and liked it. Spend of US$500 to 1,000 a month per person led the business to switch them to Claude Code for its cost controls.

    Published Jun 16, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on Opus and GPT 5.x
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16, Opus and GPT 5.x
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Opus and GPT 5.x

  11. Negative

    trial3, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Their employer, a large enterprise customer, dropped Cursor for Claude; after eight months on Cursor as their main IDE the commenter switched easily and no coworker misses it.

    Published Jun 16, 2026self-described: Large employer that dropped Cursor for Claude

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  12. Positive

    joshgachnang, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Just set their team up on a Cursor enterprise plan: cloud agents with computer use, the best AI reviewer the commenter has tested in Bugbot, and Composer 2.5 with Opus for planning.

    Published Jun 16, 2026self-described: CTO of Flourish Health, set the team up on Cursor

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Observed on Composer 2.5
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16, Composer 2.5
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Enterprise plan, Composer 2.5, Opus

  13. Positive

    bazzargh, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Their team handles the AI bills: Cursor on Auto averaged 3.9 cents a request under the old per-seat contract and 39 cents under the pooled one, with Claude models costing dollars.

    Published Jun 16, 2026self-described: Team that pays the bills for Claude, Cursor, GPT agents and Bedrock

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Specific details; Observed on Composer
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16, Composer
    Counts toward
    Operational control, admin control: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  14. Negative

    vadepaysa, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Their entire team moved off Cursor within a year, half to Codex and Claude desktop apps with Zed and half to Claude Code and Codex CLIs.

    Published Jun 16, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  15. Mixed

    rob74, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Their company went all in on Cursor and disabled JetBrains AI, until a large group of developers pushed IT to enable plugins that run Cursor in JetBrains via ACP.

    Published Jun 16, 2026self-described: Company went all in on Cursor and disabled JetBrains AI

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  16. Mixed

    Brian Scanlan, Senior Principal Systems Engineer at Intercom

    Doubling the productivity of your engineering team using AIConference session recording, DX Annual (Engineering Enablement podcast)

    Intercom's GitHub Copilot rollout and bottom-up Cursor use lifted some throughput metrics, but the company was dissatisfied with the results and moved its agent work to Claude Code.

    "…we kind of went on a normal journey, I think, like of adopting the likes of GitHub Copilot and bottoms up kind of people using Cursor. And we kind of got like some results, some improvements, throughput metrics, different things will kind of go up, but we’re ultimately dissatisfied with the results."
    Excerpt, Brian Scanlan

    Published Jun 15, 2026Intercom R&D organization

    Practitioner account, self-described; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Ran the rollout
    Role
    Name self-described; employer self-described; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-15
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  17. No opinion stated

    Michael Galloway, leads Platform Engineering at Mercari

    From AI experiments to organizational shift: Lessons from Mercari's transformationConference session recording, DX Annual (Engineering Enablement podcast)

    Says Mercari, to cut friction in getting AI tools, built a Slack bot that provisions Cursor on request with all the security and other configuration wired up, a tiny investment that produced an out-sized outcome by signaling that everybody should try AI.

    "And not only did it provision cursor for you, but it also wired up all the security and other configuration we needed so that it was ready to go for you. So that was actually a tiny little investment that produced an out-sized outcome."
    Excerpt, Michael Galloway

    Published Jun 15, 2026Company-wide AI adoption mandate across engineering and other functions

    Practitioner account; ran the rollout; counts toward Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-15
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  18. Positive

    phsource, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Show HN: Boxes.dev: ditch localhost; run Claude Code and Codex in the cloudHacker News comment

    Their company runs on Cursor and picks models per job: Kimi for easy fixes, Opus or Sonnet for plans, Composer 2.5 and smaller models for fast implementation.

    Published Jun 4, 2026self-described: Company on Cursor

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-04
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Kimi K2.5, Opus 4.8, Sonnet, Composer 2.5, GPT-5.4 mini

  19. Positive

    fourseventy, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Today I've made the difficult decision to reduce the size of Coinbase by ~14%Hacker News comment

    Their company's mostly non-technical marketing team uses Cursor web agents to change the website, with the agents opening pull requests the tech team reviews before merge.

    Published May 5, 2026self-described: Company where marketing uses Cursor web agents

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; second-hand; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Second-hand
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-05-05
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  20. Mixed

    Peter Ludwig, co-founder and chief technology officer, Applied Intuition

    Latent Space: Applied Intuition with Peter LudwigPodcast episode with publisher transcript

    Cursor was the most used coding tool at Applied Intuition for a good while, and by April 2026 Claude Code had taken that place.

    "Yeah. We use everything. So Cursor was, I think the hottest tool in the company for a good while. Now Claude Code, I think has taken the reign on that. We have a internal leader, leaderboard that we use just to sort of encourage adoption…"
    Transcript excerpt, Peter Ludwig, around 21:55 in the episode

    Published Apr 27, 2026self-described: Applied Intuition, company-wide tool use with an internal adoption leaderboard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  21. Negative

    Jeremy Crane, founder and CEO of PocketOS

    An AI Agent Just Destroyed Our Production Data. It Confessed in Writing.X post

    PocketOS's founder reports that Cursor's agent, running Claude Opus 4.6 under explicit project safety rules, deleted the company's production database and its volume backups in one Railway API call. He concludes that rules in a system prompt cannot be the only guard against destructive actions.

    "Cursor running Anthropic's flagship Claude Opus 4.6, deleted our production database and all volume-level backups in a single API call to Railway…"
    Excerpt, Jeremy Crane

    Published Apr 25, 2026self-described: Software for car rental businesses; Cursor agent with Railway infrastructure

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Artifact checked (log); Observed on Claude Opus 4.6
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    3 artifacts (log, transcript)
    Date and version
    2026-04-25, Claude Opus 4.6
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G3 (3 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G3 (3 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G3 (3 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Cursor agent running Claude Opus 4.6, with project safety rules set

  22. Mixed

    Mikhail Parakhin, chief technology officer, Shopify

    Latent Space: Shopify with Mikhail ParakhinPodcast episode with publisher transcript

    Shopify's usage chart shows IDE tools such as Cursor not shrinking but growing more slowly than command-line agents since December 2025.

    "…tools, uh, that require IDEs such as, uh, GitHub, Copilot or Cursor, they’re not exactly shrinking, but they’re not growing as fast. Like, uh, red, red line is, is the IDE kind of tools."
    Transcript excerpt, Mikhail Parakhin, around 3:52 in the episode

    Published Apr 22, 2026self-described: Shopify, every employee chooses their coding tool

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  23. Positive

    Thoughtworks Technology Radar, April 2026 edition

    Cursor | Technology Radar | ThoughtworksTechnology Radar assessment, Thoughtworks

    Thoughtworks puts Cursor in its Adopt ring as a default choice for its delivery teams beside Claude Code. Many of its developers prefer supervising the agent in the IDE to review and refine plans.

    "…consistently appearing alongside Claude Code as a default choice for our delivery teams. It has matured into a comprehensive agentic environment with features such as plan mode, hooks and subagents. While terminal-based agents remain popular, many of our developers find that supervising an agent within an IDE provides a richer experience for reviewing and refining plans before execution."
    Excerpt, Thoughtworks

    Published Apr 15, 2026Global software consultancy delivery teams

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Name self-described; employer self-described; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-15
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Adopt ring, April 2026

  24. Negative

    dominicholmes, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Their team was a Cursor company but canceled every seat for Conductor's parallel sandboxed agents, which they found far more productive.

    Published Apr 3, 2026self-described: Team of heavy Conductor users running parallel agents

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; opinion; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Opinion
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Opinion, no use stated
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-03
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  25. Negative

    dirtbag__dad, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Was spending around US$2k a week on premium models in Cursor when their team unanimously chose hiring another engineer over more Cursor. Switched to Claude Code Max, equally prolific at 1/10th the price, and calls Cursor's pricing model problematic.

    Published Apr 3, 2026self-described: Team weighing Cursor spend against hiring an engineer

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Observed on Opus
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-03, Opus
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  26. Negative

    mc_escher, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Their team stopped using Cursor after US$2,500 of unauthorized weekend usage, citing no 2FA and risky defaults such as admin-only usage settings being off.

    Published Apr 3, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-03
    Counts toward
    Operational control, admin control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  27. Negative

    Jcampuzano2, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Their company calculated enterprise renewal pricing rising four to eight times under usage-based terms with a per-token surcharge, and committed to far less Cursor spend.

    Published Apr 3, 2026self-described: Company on an enterprise contract

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-03
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  28. Positive

    simplyluke, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    A daily user in a large production codebase delegates simpler Linear tasks to cloud agents and picks them up in the editor, and values not being tied to one model provider.

    Published Apr 2, 2026self-described: Large production codebase

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout; Observed on alpha
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-02, alpha
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, models and deployment: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  29. Negative

    primex, Hacker News commenter

    Cursor billed us US$450 for a seat that existed for secondsHacker News thread

    Their team was billed about US$450 for a full annual Teams seat added by mistake and removed within seconds, with no warning in the UI, and support called it expected.

    Published Mar 14, 2026self-described: Team on a Cursor Teams plan

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Specific details; Observed on Teams plan
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-03-14, Teams plan
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  30. Negative

    bushido, Hacker News commenter who sets tool policy at their company

    Comment on: Shall I implement it? NoHacker News comment

    Barred Cursor at their company after its automatic model and effort selection moved to weaker models mid-task and produced bad results.

    Published Mar 12, 2026self-described: Co-founder of SkipUp, who barred Cursor at the company

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-03-12
    Not counted
    Operational control, models and deployment: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  31. No opinion stated

    Ty Smith, Principal Engineer, and Anshu Chada, Director of Engineering at Uber

    How Uber uses AI for development: inside lookNewsletter deepdive, The Pragmatic Engineer

    At Uber, Claude Code usage nearly doubled from 32% to 63% between December and February while IDE-based tools such as Cursor plateaued.

    "Claude Code usage nearly doubled in 3 months, from 32% in Dec to 63% in Feb, while IDE-based tools (Cursor, IntelliJ) have plateaued."
    Excerpt, Ty Smith

    Published Mar 10, 2026self-described: Uber engineering, about 3,000 people in the tech function

    Practitioner account, self-described; second-hand; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Second-hand
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-03-10
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current

  32. No opinion stated

    Gergely Orosz, author of The Pragmatic Engineer

    AI Tooling for Software Engineers in 2026Independent developer survey, The Pragmatic Engineer

    In The Pragmatic Engineer's 2026 reader survey, 19% named Cursor as a tool they love against 46% for Claude Code, and senior leaders favored Claude Code most.

    "Claude Code is the most loved tool at 46%, far ahead of Cursor on 19% and GitHub Copilot at 9%. Senior leaders are especially enthusiastic about Claude Code."
    Excerpt, Gergely Orosz

    Published Mar 3, 2026self-described: Reader survey of software engineers and engineering leaders

    Practitioner account, self-described; second-hand; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Second-hand
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-03-03
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current

  33. Positive

    Chintan Turakhia, leads engineering at Coinbase

    This week on How I AI: 5 OpenClaw agents run my home, finances, and code & How Coinbase scaled AI to 1,000+ engineersPodcast episode show notes, How I AI (Lenny's Newsletter)

    Turakhia used Cursor daily for months before asking Coinbase's engineers to adopt it, then ran a Cursor Wins Slack channel and analyzed Cursor usage data by cohort. Coinbase cut pull request review time from 150 hours to 15, and agent-heavy users were 16 times more productive with AI than other users.

    "Chintan spent months personally using Cursor daily, discovering use cases and techniques before asking his team to adopt it. By tackling real bugs and showing concrete wins, he built credibility that made adoption natural rather than forced."
    Excerpt, Chintan Turakhia

    Published Mar 2, 2026Coinbase engineering organization of more than 1,000 engineers

    Practitioner account, self-described; second-hand; not counted until substantiated How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Second-hand
    Role
    Name self-described; employer self-described; role self-described (leads AI acceleration at Coinbase)
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-03-02
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, measured outcomes: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current

  34. Negative

    songcj, admin of an annual Cursor Team plan

    Team Seat Management Best Practices: How Do You Handle Member Changes?Cursor forum post

    A team admin found 66 of 86 annual seats still held by removed members, with only 13 active, and asks how to avoid paying for seats that cannot be reassigned.

    Published Feb 26, 2026self-described: Annual Team plan with 86 seats

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Ran the rollout; Observed on Annual Team Plan
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-26, Annual Team Plan
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Annual Team plan

  35. Mixed

    valentinoPereira, member of a team on a Cursor team plan

    Reply in: Anyone here using cursor with a team? what's been the hardest part?Cursor forum post

    Their team uses Cursor rules heavily but still finds model output unpredictable, and runs out of allocated credits, keeping a Google AI Pro plan as backup.

    Published Feb 18, 2026self-described: Team plan

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Observed on team plan
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-18, team plan
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Teams plan

  36. Positive

    Antoine Cormouls, developer at a company using Cursor on a large monorepo

    Reply in: Anyone here using cursor with a team? what's been the hardest part?Cursor forum post

    Their company runs Plan Mode, agent implementation against tests, developer review in the IDE, automated review and a final human review, since code is easy to produce and review is the bottleneck.

    Published Feb 18, 2026self-described: Company team on a huge monorepo, trunk-based development

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-18
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  37. Positive

    Mark Harrison, member of a team on Cursor Pro

    Reply in: Anyone here using cursor with a team? what's been the hardest part?Cursor forum post

    Their team keeps agent rules in the repo through AGENTS.md, nearly dropped Cursor in late 2025 but renewed after it improved, and stays near 80% of allowance by planning first on auto.

    Published Feb 17, 2026self-described: Small team, most members on Cursor Pro with annual renewals

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Ran the rollout; Specific details; Observed on Cursor Pro
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-17, Cursor Pro
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Cursor Pro, auto mode

  38. Mixed

    Flavien, Lead Frontend Developer

    Why we're moving from Cursor to Claude Code (and why you should too)Personal blog post, 56kode

    A lead frontend developer says Cursor's business model isn't ideal for teams, since Opus is expensive and overage is shared at the organization level, and parallel agents saturated RAM across IDE instances. Moved to Claude Code after shipping a personal project with coding agents.

    Published Feb 10, 2026self-described: Frontend team running client and in-house projects

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly; Observed on Sonnet
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-10, Sonnet
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Cursor with Sonnet and Opus, then Claude Code with Opus

  39. No opinion stated

    Alistair Gray, software engineer at Stripe

    Minions: Stripe's one-shot, end-to-end coding agentsCompany engineering blog post, Stripe Dot Dev Blog

    Stripe developers plan and collaborate with Cursor and Claude, and Stripe's unattended in-house agents read the same agent rule files that Cursor and Claude Code use.

    "In general, minions read the same coding agent rule files that human-operated tools such as Cursor and Claude Code do, consuming several different agent rule file formats."
    Excerpt, Alistair Gray

    Published Feb 9, 2026Stripe engineering, internal unattended coding agents

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  40. Negative

    cmiles74, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: We mourn our craftHacker News comment

    Junior engineers on their team using Cursor and Claude have checked in small breaking query changes, and AI tooling has nearly doubled the time the commenter spends on pull request review.

    Published Feb 7, 2026self-described: Java projects, team with junior engineers

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; second-hand; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Second-hand
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-07
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  41. Positive

    znq, SIROC venture studio

    Comment on: Ask HN: Has your whole engineering team gone big into AI coding? How's it going?Hacker News comment

    At an 18-person venture studio pushing Cursor and Claude Code adoption, well-specified prompts turned a 20-hour effort into about 3 hours, while weak specs and no verification produce broken systems.

    Published Feb 5, 2026self-described: SIROC, 18-person venture studio

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-05
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  42. Negative

    interestpiqued, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Claude Code is suddenly everywhere inside MicrosoftHacker News comment

    Their firmware team had a Cursor honeymoon before it was sidelined: the agent usually got a couple of attempts, then the engineers solved the problem themselves.

    Published Feb 2, 2026self-described: Firmware team

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-02
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  43. Positive

    Akshay Misra and Karmi Nguyen, engineering blog authors at Grab

    Cursor at Grab: Adoption and impactCompany engineering blog post, Grab Tech

    Grab reports that 98% of its tech staff became monthly Cursor users and about 75% use it weekly, with about half of suggestions accepted and over a third of merge requests using Cursor. Engineers say tasks that took a full day now take hours, helped by preconfigured rules for Grab's conventions.

    "Qualitative feedback confirms what the adoption numbers suggest: tasks that took a full day to complete now take hours."
    Excerpt, Akshay Misra and Karmi Nguyen

    Published Jan 29, 2026Grab engineering, Southeast Asian superapp; Cursor since late 2024 beside other tools

    Practitioner account, self-described; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Specific details
    Role
    Name self-described; employer self-described; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-29
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, measured outcomes: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Cursor with Grab's own monorepo indexing and shared rules

  44. Positive

    disillusionist, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: There is an AI code review bubbleHacker News comment

    Their company trialed Greptile for several weeks against its current Cursor review and declined to buy it, citing behavior such as overwriting pull request descriptions.

    Published Jan 26, 2026self-described: Company that ran a multi-week Greptile trial

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-26
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  45. No opinion stated

    Hao He, Courtney Miller, Shyam Agarwal, Christian Kästner and Bogdan Vasilescu, Carnegie Mellon University

    Speed at the Cost of Quality: How Cursor AI Increases Short-Term Velocity and Long-Term Complexity in Open-Source ProjectsResearch paper, arXiv (MSR 2026)

    A Carnegie Mellon study of Cursor-adopting GitHub projects found 3-5x increases in lines added in the first adoption month, with gains dissipating after two months, while static analysis warnings rose 30% and code complexity 41% as persistent technical debt.

    "First, the adoption of Cursor leads to significant, large, but transient velocity increases: Projects experience 3-5x increases in lines added in the first adoption month, but gains dissipate after two months. Concurrently, we observe persistent technical debt accumulation: Static analysis warnings increase by 30% and code complexity increases by 41% post-adoption…"
    Excerpt, Hao He

    Published Jan 26, 2026self-described: 806 open-source GitHub projects that adopted Cursor between January 2024 and March 2025

    Practitioner account; structured test; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Ran a structured test; Artifact checked (dataset)
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    2 artifacts (dataset)
    Date and version
    2026-01-26
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, measured outcomes: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Cursor adoptions from January 2024 to March 2025

  46. No opinion stated

    James Reggio, chief technology officer, Brex

    Latent Space: Brex's AI Hail Mary, with James ReggioPodcast episode with publisher transcript

    Brex buys a few seats of several tools and lets employees pick Cursor, Windsurf or Claude Code credits, using usage trends at renewal.

    "You can pick, you know, between like Cursor, Windsurf, Cloud Code, Credits, like, and you can basically craft your stack to your preference and easily switch between them."
    Transcript excerpt, James Reggio, around 21:15 in the episode

    Published Jan 17, 2026self-described: Brex, a few seats of several tools chosen by employees

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  47. Positive

    ziml77, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Graphite is joining CursorHacker News comment

    For their business, Cursor's value is many models under one contract with data privacy terms that cover whichever model a developer picks.

    Published Dec 19, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; opinion; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Opinion
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Opinion, no use stated
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-12-19
    Not counted
    Operational control, data control: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, models and deployment: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  48. Mixed

    YK Sugi, Eventual engineering team

    How We Use AI Coding AgentsCompany engineering blog post, Eventual

    Eventual's engineering team is split: some use only Claude Code, while others prefer Cursor because Composer finishes small, contained changes quickly after Opus writes the plan in plan mode.

    "Cursor only: Others prefer Cursor. The argument: it's ridiculously fast. For small, contained changes where you know exactly what needs to happen, Cursor's Composer rips through it."
    Excerpt, YK Sugi

    Published Dec 15, 2025Eventual, maker of the Daft data engine; team split between Claude Code and Cursor

    Practitioner account, self-described; second-hand; not counted until substantiated How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Second-hand; Observed on Composer
    Role
    Name self-described; employer self-described; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-12-15, Composer
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Cursor plan mode with Opus, then Composer to carry out the plan

  49. Negative

    Stergios (StergiosDikos), developer on a team that accesses Claude through AWS Bedrock

    Reply in: Stop Shipping Unstable BuildsCursor forum post

    Their team reports bugs and poor support: enabling AWS Bedrock for Claude stops every other model, and Cursor stuck in Max mode doubles their cost.

    Published Dec 9, 2025self-described: Team using AWS Bedrock for Claude in Cursor

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-12-09
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    AWS Bedrock models, Max mode

  50. Mixed

    Tripti Sheth, Senior Director of Software Engineering, Monitoring Cloud Notification Management, Salesforce

    Building AI-Powered Migration Tools: Compressing 4 Sprints Into 3 Days with Cursor, Windsurf, and ClaudeCompany engineering blog post, Salesforce Engineering

    Sheth's Salesforce team began its migration tool in Cursor with plain prompts and no rules, which produced unmanageable code adding 1,000 lines per simple task. The team then used rules and memories in Windsurf and a shared CLAUDE.md file in Claude.

    "Initially, we started with Cursor, using straightforward prompts without any rules or structured knowledge. This approach led to unmanageable code, where each simple task added 1,000 lines with no modularization, reuse, or abstraction."
    Excerpt, Tripti Sheth

    Published Nov 17, 2025Migration tooling for 1,200 alert notification policies

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (Senior Director of Software Engineering)
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-17
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  51. Positive

    Lakshmi Dontamsetti, Senior Manager of Software Engineering for Mobile Performance at Salesforce

    How Cursor AI Slashed Dashboard Migration Time 75% Across 240 QueriesEngineering blog Q&A, Salesforce Engineering Blog

    Dontamsetti's team used Cursor and an MCP server to move Splunk dashboards to Tableau, backing up about 240 queries across 20 dashboards, and reports engineering time cut 75%. Explicit rules and a schema mapping document fixed semantically wrong early queries; 20 to 30 percent needed human oversight.

    Published Nov 5, 2025self-described: Salesforce Mobile Performance Engineering team, Splunk to Tableau migration

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Artifact checked (organization page)
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (Senior Manager of Software Engineering for Mobile Performance)
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    2 artifacts (organization page)
    Date and version
    2025-11-05
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor with an MCP server

  52. Negative

    Adrian (QTom), developer whose company provides AI coding tools

    Reply in: 2.0, A step in the wrong directionCursor forum post

    While Cursor 2.0 performed poorly, their company gave the team Claude Max, and a task the poster had fought in Cursor for a week took a single day in Claude.

    Published Nov 2, 2025self-described: Company that provided a Claude Max 20x plan

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on version 2.0
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, author profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-02, version 2.0
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor 2.0, then Claude Max 20x

  53. Positive

    NitpickLawyer, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Composer: Building a fast frontier model with RLHacker News comment

    Their team runs its own tiered task suite on each new model and finds cheaper models such as Cursor's fast model good enough for some tasks while reserving larger ones for others.

    Published Oct 30, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; opinion; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Opinion; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Opinion, no use stated
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-30, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  54. Mixed

    bunderbunder, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Two things LLM coding agents are still bad atHacker News comment

    Reviewing a feature written with Cursor, the commenter judged only about 200 lines necessary because it ignored the team's utility library. Approved it since hunting the right functions would take all day.

    Published Oct 9, 2025self-described: Team where management mandated Cursor

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; second-hand; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Second-hand; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-09, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  55. Mixed

    saltyoldman, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 1.7Hacker News comment

    Their company standardized on Cursor; the commenter likes its tab completion but finds the accept and undo flow redundant with Git and resents a fork that wipes their Python extension stack.

    Published Oct 1, 2025self-described: Company standardized on Cursor

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-01, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  56. Positive

    Kristin Foss, VP of Software Engineering for Customer Centric Engineering at Salesforce

    How AI Tools Cut Customer Escalation Time: From Days of Manual Work to MinutesCompany engineering blog post, Salesforce Engineering

    Kristin Foss's 180-person Salesforce team uses Cursor, Windsurf and Claude CLI to build working reproductions of customer issues from internal source code, cutting reproduction work that took hours or days down to minutes.

    "…our CCE engineers now leverage Cursor, Windsurf, and Claude CLI. These AI-powered development tools allow them to quickly create working reproductions that mirror customer problems using internal source code, drastically speeding up our debugging workflows."
    Excerpt, Kristin Foss

    Published Sep 29, 2025Salesforce Customer Centric Engineering, 180 engineers handling customer escalations

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Ran the rollout; Artifact checked (organization page); Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (VP of Software Engineering for Customer Centric Engineering (CCE))
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    2 artifacts (organization page)
    Date and version
    2025-09-29, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  57. Mixed

    Suhail Patel, leads the platform teams at Monzo Bank

    How tech companies measure the impact of AI on software developmentNewsletter interview, The Pragmatic Engineer

    Says Monzo has firmly resisted AI in areas storing customer data, even sanitized, and that Cursor, asked to write a shell script, every now and then suggests a random license or API key someone else put in their environment and Cursor's agent indexed.

    "Every now and then when I instruct Cursor to write a shell script, it will suggest some random license key or API key that someone else put in their environment, and which Cursor’s agent indexed."
    Excerpt, Suhail Patel

    Published Sep 16, 2025self-described: Regulated UK neobank, platform engineering

    not counted until substantiated How GILD checked it
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-09-16, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, measured outcomes: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated
    Not counted
    Operational control, data control: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  58. Positive

    Scott Yancey, EVP of Software Engineering at Salesforce

    Building Sustainable Enterprise AI Adoption: Cultural Strategies That Achieved 95% Developer EngagementEngineering blog Q&A, Salesforce Engineering Blog

    Cursor could not handle Salesforce's monolith of hundreds of thousands of files, so the team scoped workspaces to team-owned modules and adopted it for the 80% of work it fits.

    Published Sep 8, 2025self-described: Salesforce, teams working in the Core monolith

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Artifact checked (organization page); Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (EVP of Software Engineering)
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    3 artifacts (organization page)
    Date and version
    2025-09-08, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  59. Positive

    Peter Eysermans, engineer at madewithlove

    Automatic pull request reviewing with Cursor's BugbotEngineering blog post, madewithlove blog

    Has used Bugbot since the beta; in a month it caught around ten real bugs, with occasional false positives. Calls US$40/month on the more expensive end and says Bugbot can offer real value for small teams with limited review time.

    Published Sep 2, 2025self-described: Small engineering team at a software consultancy

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Cost predictability and limits, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Used it directly; Artifact checked (organization page); Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (CTO in residence)
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    4 artifacts (organization page)
    Date and version
    2025-09-02, Bugbot, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Bugbot from the beta, then the US$40 per month subscription

  60. Negative

    Daniel Moka, software engineer and newsletter author

    Why I switched from Cursor to Claude CodeNewsletter, Craft Better Software (Substack)

    After their team tried Cursor and Claude Code side by side, Moka stopped using Cursor and moved fully to Claude Code, which they found better for real development work.

    Published Aug 23, 2025self-described: Their development team

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    sponsor (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-23, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  61. Positive

    Rachna Singh, Senior Director of Software Engineering, Einstein Activity Capture, Salesforce

    How Cursor AI Cut Legacy Code Coverage Time by 85%Company engineering blog post, Salesforce Engineering

    Rachna Singh's Salesforce team used Cursor to cut test coverage work on legacy repositories from 26 engineer days per repository to 4.

    "Cursor delivered dramatic acceleration, reducing the effort from 26 engineer days per repository to just 4 engineer days…"
    Excerpt, Rachna Singh

    Published Aug 18, 2025Legacy Java, Scala and Kotlin repositories under an 80% coverage mandate

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer self-described; role on a page the person does not control (Senior Director of Software Engineering for Einstein Activity Capture)
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-18, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  62. Positive

    benbayard, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor CLIHacker News comment

    Cursor has been a workhorse at their company for months, while Claude Code looped and deleted files in their codebase without completing a meaningful ticket.

    Published Aug 8, 2025self-described: Company using Cursor as its main tool for months

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-08, Sonnet 4.1, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    GPT-5 and Sonnet

  63. No opinion stated

    Marina Simakov, Zenity Labs

    AgentFlayer: When a Jira Ticket Can Steal Your SecretsIndependent security research, Zenity Labs blog

    Simakov of Zenity Labs shows malicious Jira tickets, read through the Jira MCP server when Cursor is asked to handle them, getting Cursor's agent to exfiltrate a repository JWT token and find local AWS credentials once the wording avoided terms like API keys.

    "A 0click attack through a malicious Jira ticket can cause Cursor to exfiltrate secrets from the repository or local file system."
    Excerpt, Marina Simakov

    Published Aug 1, 2025Security research on Cursor with the Jira MCP server in auto-run mode

    Practitioner account, self-described; structured test; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Ran a structured test; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-01, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, data control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor agent with Jira MCP, auto-run mode

  64. Positive

    Manoj Vaitla, senior engineer at Salesforce

    How AI Test Automation Cut Developer Productivity Bottlenecks by 30% at ScaleCompany engineering blog post, Salesforce Engineering

    Manoj Vaitla's Salesforce team built its test failure triage agent with Cursor in 4 to 6 weeks, work they expected to take months, and credits Cursor's codebase-aware suggestions. The agent cut failure resolution time by 30%.

    "What would have taken months to build, the team delivered in just 4-6 weeks. Cursor’s deep integration with the codebase provided immediate, contextually relevant suggestions during the development of the TF-Triage Agent."
    Excerpt, Manoj Vaitla

    Published Jul 30, 2025Salesforce Platform Quality Engineering, triage for 6 million daily tests

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (a senior engineer)
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-07-30, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  65. Mixed

    Steve Sewell, co-founder and CEO of Builder.io

    How I use Claude Code (+ my best tips)Company blog post, Builder.io blog

    A Cursor power user for over a year, Sewell moved agent work to Claude Code, saying no AI agent but Claude Code has updated Builder's 18,000-line React component and Cursor needs more babysitting. Still uses Cursor for Command+K and tab completions.

    "I still use Cursor for quick Command+K completions and tab completions. But the agent sidebar? I only touch it when Claude is down."
    Excerpt, Steve Sewell

    Published Jul 11, 2025Builder.io codebase, including an 18,000-line React component

    Vendor material, self-described; direct use; not counted, from a competitor's side How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Vendor material
    Checked
    Self-described; Competitor staff: not counted as independent; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Name self-described; employer self-described; role unknown
    Relationship
    competitor employee (confirmed); vendor employee (self disclosed); vendor published (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-07-11, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  66. Positive

    Geeta Shankar, performance engineer at Salesforce

    Boosting Developer Productivity with AI: Faster Dashboards, Automated Testing, and 70% Less Setup TimeCompany engineering blog post, Salesforce Engineering

    Geeta Shankar's Salesforce team uses Cursor to generate functional and edge-case tests for Code Builder, and its JMeter load tests now take 1 to 2 hours to write. They previously took days.

    "With Cursor, JMeter-based load tests were generated in 1-2 hours instead of days."
    Excerpt, Geeta Shankar

    Published Jun 25, 2025Salesforce Code Builder performance team, browser IDE load and regression testing

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (a performance engineer)
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-25, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  67. Positive

    Vivienne Wei, with Geeta Shankar and Shiva Nimmagadda, Salesforce Engineering

    How Salesforce Engineering Operationalized AI Productivity at ScaleEngineering blog post, Salesforce Engineering Blog

    Salesforce made Cursor a default coding agent, reached over 90% engagement across six engineering clouds in three weeks, and upgraded 475 engineers who exceeded default token limits.

    Published Jun 23, 2025self-described: Salesforce Engineering, six engineering clouds

    Practitioner account, self-described; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-23, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Organization-wide
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor and CodeGenie as default coding agents, tracked in Engineering 360

  68. Mixed

    Kieran Klaassen, general manager of Cora at Every

    Transcript: 'How Two Engineers Ship Like a Team of 15 With AI Agents'Podcast episode transcript, AI & I (Every)

    Does agent work in Claude Code and keeps Cursor open to edit files. Calls Cursor and Windsurf the old school way of coding and one step, and says Cursor is very good with Claude 4 but confusing for its million versions.

    "So we need to rethink again, hey, Cursor, Windsurf, the old school way of coding was great. More of the vibe coding. That was one step."
    Excerpt, Kieran Klaassen

    Published Jun 11, 2025Two-engineer team building Cora, an AI email product at Every

    Practitioner account, name and role on their organization's own page; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Name and role on their organization's own page; Competitor staff: not counted as independent; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name on a page the person does not control; employer on a page the person does not control; role on a page the person does not control (Member of Frontier Team)
    Relationship
    program member (self disclosed); program member (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-11, Claude 4, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Operational control, models and deployment: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor and Windsurf before a move to Claude Code

  69. Positive

    Daniel Koch, vice president of engineering at Jit

    How Jit overcame developer resistance to shift to CursorArticle, LeadDev

    Jit's VP of engineering moved the whole engineering team from JetBrains to Cursor and ran workshops on Cursor rules. Once the rules were written the agent followed the codebase, and two months in the team measured 1.8x to 3x faster delivery of new features.

    "…once we defined the right [Cursor] rules, we started getting better results. The agents could adapt, understand our codebase, and behave much more intelligently compared to working without any guidance."
    Excerpt, Daniel Koch

    Published May 15, 2025self-described: Jit engineering team, moved from JetBrains IDEs to Cursor

    Practitioner account, self-described; second-hand; not counted until substantiated How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Second-hand; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Reports others' experience
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-15, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor agent mode with shared Cursor rules and MCP servers

  70. Mixed

    hallh, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Notes on rolling out Cursor and Claude CodeHacker News comment

    On a newer React project, fast lint and test runs in Cursor were essential because models kept using outdated patterns. With Gemini they got a polished UI only with a lot of guidance.

    Published May 8, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-08, Gemini, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Gemini

  71. Mixed

    Alex Ghiculescu, co-founder of Tanda

    Nobody Codes Here Anymore: Notes on rolling out Cursor and Claude CodeNewsletter, Alex Ghiculescu's Newsletter (Substack)

    Offering about 40 developers Cursor or Claude Code, Ghiculescu saw slightly higher Cursor adoption and says that, from what he has seen, Cursor "seems to be content making smaller and more self contained changes". Sticks with Claude Code to keep Sublime Text; set up Cursor rules and estimates being about 20% more productive thanks to agents.

    Published Apr 29, 2025self-described: Tanda, mature Ruby on Rails SaaS codebase, about 40 developers

    Practitioner account, self-described; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Ran the rollout; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer self-described; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-04-29, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Technical leadership
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Cursor fixed-price plan alongside pay-per-token Claude Code

  72. Negative

    tartieret, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: An update to our pricingHacker News comment

    Their company reviewed Cursor but standardized on Windsurf, because Cursor's dev container and WSL support, which most of their developers need, was rough.

    Published Apr 22, 2025self-described: CTO at Panevo; company standardized on Windsurf, devs on WSL

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Ran the rollout; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-04-22, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Professional team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  73. Negative

    eranation, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor IDE support hallucinates lockout policy, causes user cancellationsHacker News comment

    Moved their whole team to Cursor as an enterprise customer and is considering canceling over nonexistent support and bugs such as creating new files where an edit belongs in a monorepo.

    Published Apr 16, 2025self-described: Enterprise customer who moved their whole team to Cursor

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; ran the rollout; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Ran the rollout; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran the rollout
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-04-16, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Very small team
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Enterprise plan

  74. No opinion stated

    Darth (@darthnugget), X user

    Post on X: a cloud agent burned through UltraX post

    A Cursor cloud agent burned through an Ultra seat's usage in 3 days, this user reports.

    "How it feels getting Grokbot token reset after a rouge cursor cloud agent burned through an Ultra in 3 days."
    Excerpt, Darth

    Published Oct 27, 2026self-described: Solo, Cursor Ultra with cloud agents

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  75. No opinion stated

    Aryan Iyappan (@aryaniyaps), X user

    Post on X: Cursor cuts autonomous runs shortX post

    On tasks with more model autonomy, this user finds Cursor slow at times and cutting execution short, which backfires.

    "@valasellis on tasks where I give the model more autonomy. Cursor kinda makes everything slow and lags at times and tries to cut short execution time which backfires most times…"
    Excerpt, Aryan Iyappan

    Published Oct 27, 2026self-described: Solo

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  76. No opinion stated

    nrclark, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on Hacker News: tooling is not a moat for developersHacker News comment

    For developers the tooling is no moat, this commenter writes: the same jobs get done with Cursor CLI or open tools as with Claude Code.

    "That might be true for general consumers, yes. Not so true for software developers though. For developers, the tooling is definitely not a moat, and that means the models are what must differentiate. Claude code is very polished, but I can get the same jobs done using Cursor CLI or any number of open-source coding harnesses (I like Pi, personally). Most plugins/skills/mcps are portable between harnesses with minimal or no effort. I use the same skills, rules, and MCPs across claude code, cursor, and pi. My tools/plugins aren't identical between harnesses, but porting them from one to another is just a prompt away."
    Excerpt, nrclark

    Published Oct 27, 2026self-described: Solo developer

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  77. No opinion stated

    usernamedotjs, Reddit r/cursor commenter on the Ultra plan

    Comment on r/cursor: Ultra credit wording removedReddit comment

    An Ultra subscriber reports using 30% of a month's tokens in one day on Claude models and notes the US$400 credit wording is gone from the plan page.

    "Cursor explicitly removed the wording on the Ultra plan that you get $400 worth of credits. There’s another commenter down here that experienced the same thing as me. Essentially this month in Cursor I used up 30% of my monthly tokens in ONE day for models like Claude. Never has been the case before with the same workflow. Try Claude out yourself to compare on usage."
    Excerpt, usernamedotjs

    Published Oct 26, 2026self-described: Solo, Claude models on Ultra

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  78. No opinion stated

    liftershifter, Reddit r/cursor poster

    Help me understand my token usageReddit post

    Two Claude Opus 5.5 requests at a 300k context moved this user's third-party model spending from 83% to 92% of the month.

    "Help me understand my token usage I checked my "Other models" spending and it said 83% were used. I made 2 requests to Claude Opus 5.5 Effort Medium, Context 300k and after those 2 requests my usage jumped to 92%. No images. Attached is the context information expanded in Cursor for that conversation where ir says that \~104K tokens were used. $60 plan (Pro+) Usage says 3.9M Claude Opus 5.5 Medium About 7-8 days ago I used Claude Opus 5.5 all day (really, spamming it non-stop) and added only only \~30% to my usage. Spending says I consumed 54M Claude Opus 5.5 medium tokens, 11M muse wonder 1 high etc., that day. This was in the previous billing cycle. What am I misunderstanding?"
    Excerpt, liftershifter

    Published Oct 26, 2026self-described: Solo, Claude Opus 5.5 at 300k context

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Claude Opus 5.5, medium effort, 300k context

  79. No opinion stated

    boogiefromzk, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on Hacker News: routing work to a cheaper modelHacker News comment

    After many tries this commenter got stable results by having a strong model hand verification to a cheaper one, so the account's limits drain more slowly.

    "Last months I was searching for a way to make smart AI model submit and verify the work to cheap model so that it will cost less, and after many try and failures I was able to get stable result where I use Fable and its limits spent slower than overall account limit because most context intensive work is done by Sonnet. At the same time the response quaility is still Fable. I also made sure Opus controls Grok in Cursor and was able to spend quite a lot of Grok getting useful results. Also should work in as pair of Astra + Luna in CodeX. The article includes a link to GitHub where there are agents and rules, and the enable-delegation skill, which helps to make sure it's set up in a workable manner."
    Excerpt, boogiefromzk

    Published Oct 26, 2026self-described: Solo

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  80. No opinion stated

    Smart-Apartment-4089, Reddit r/cursor poster on Cursor Ultra

    Cursor Ultra "Cursor Models" finished in one weekReddit post

    About 30 code reviews on Grok 4.7 used 93% of a Cursor Ultra seat's monthly Cursor-model usage, against a similar month before.

    "Cursor Ultra "Cursor Models" finished in one week It's insane how fast the quota is drawing this month. Anyone else feels the same? Just a bunch of code reviews (around 30) has eaten 93% of monthly usage. Grok 4.7 xhigh exlusively (non fast) Last month the similar amount of code reviews was resulting in perhaps 30% of quota used..."
    Excerpt, Smart-Apartment-4089

    Published Oct 26, 2026self-described: Solo, about 30 code reviews on Grok 4.7

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Cursor Ultra, Grok 4.7 xhigh

  81. No opinion stated

    redgreenblue (@redgreenbl35768), X user

    Post on X: side-tracking burned a third of the monthX post

    Over 72 hours Cursor kept opening new issues and claiming unfinished work done, burning over a third of the month's usage with nothing delivered, this user reports.

    "Cursor won't stop trying to open up new issues, side tracking without completing work, hallucinating completion... behavior only started in the last 72h. Happens one turn after correcting it. It's burned over 1/3 of monthly usage on this behavior with nothing delivered. why…"
    Excerpt, redgreenblue

    Published Oct 25, 2026self-described: Solo

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  82. No opinion stated

    Initial_Promotion511, Reddit r/cursor poster

    The US$20 plan on Composer and Auto on r/cursorReddit post

    On the US$20 plan, mainly with Composer in Auto mode, the included usage covered this developer's daily work.

    "I previously used the $20 plan, mainly with Composer in Auto mode, and the included usage was more than enough for my daily development work."
    Excerpt, Initial_Promotion511

    Published Oct 24, 2026self-described: Solo daily development

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    US$20 plan, Composer in Auto mode

  83. No opinion stated

    PewDiePwnn, Reddit r/cursor commenter

    Comment on r/cursor: credits paid for, not receivedReddit comment

    A user who paid for credits and did not receive them could reach only Cursor's AI support agent, which offered to close the ticket as a duplicate.

    "I'm in a similar boat, I purchased credits but didn't receive them, but they took the money. Tried and tried to get hold of them and the only response I get is the Sam Ai saying it's going to close a duplicate ticket? I'm still waiting. So annoying."
    Excerpt, PewDiePwnn

    Published Oct 23, 2026self-described: Solo, bought credits

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  84. No opinion stated

    MarkH (@markh137), X user

    Post on X: a day with Cursor on PremiumX post

    On Premium, a day of basic work used 35% of the allowance before the model dropped to Sonnet, and agents left tracker issues open and built their own deploy in place of CI.

    "A day with Cursor, on Premium, 35% use on basic stuff in a day, kicked down to Sonnet, completed issues not closed in the tracker, Agents don't understand the UI behaviour (paste this into terminal with no paste), Agents build their own deploy instead of CI. After smashing everything with Fable/Opus for weeks now it's like stepping back six months, back to 'managing' agents vs letting them get on with it, and being left to do the house keeping."
    Excerpt, MarkH

    Published Oct 23, 2026self-described: Solo, Cursor Premium

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Cursor Premium

  85. No opinion stated

    chrislonardo, Reddit r/cursor poster on the legacy Ultra plan

    Legacy Ultra bill on r/cursorReddit post

    On the legacy US$200 Ultra plan, a heavy user's monthly bill reached US$440 with on-demand usage.

    "I have been on the legacy Cursor Ultra ($200/month) plan for a while now, and have only gone over my limit a few times. Last month, my total bill ended up being $440, but I used it heavily and didn't think much of it."
    Excerpt, chrislonardo

    Published Oct 22, 2026self-described: Solo, heavy use on the legacy US$200 Ultra plan

    Not counted

    Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked. Kept in the record; it takes part in no figure.

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Legacy Cursor Ultra, US$200 a month

  86. Positive

    charrondev, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXHacker News comment

    Rarely used OpenAI models in Cursor; its first-party Composer and Grok models are priced well with generous included limits, while Anthropic models cost more than they were worth to them.

    Published Aug 29, 2026self-described: Uses Cursor at work and for personal projects

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on Composer, grok-cursor, Sonnet 4.5 and 4.6
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-08-29, Composer, grok-cursor, Sonnet 4.5 and 4.6
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  87. Positive

    rippeltippel, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXHacker News comment

    Stays on Cursor to switch models: plans with GPT-5.6 Sol or Terra, implements with Composer, uses Claude for some tasks, cheaper than two separate subscriptions.

    Published Aug 29, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on Sol, Terra, Composer; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-08-29, Sol, Terra, Composer
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Operational control, models and deployment: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  88. Positive

    jkukul, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV exportHacker News comment

    Sometimes uses the Cursor CLI, a terminal agent, to switch between major models, for example implementing with Opus and reviewing with Sol, since models by different providers can find different issues in the code.

    Published Aug 1, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-08-01
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Cursor CLI

  89. Negative

    Zak Thompson, developer at an organization with an approved model list

    Cursor IDE force enabling Grok 4.5 and setting as default model, regardless of my initial selectionCursor forum post

    After an update, Cursor re-enabled Grok 4.5 and overrode their chosen model even when disabled, which the poster calls a trust and security breach because their organization has not approved Grok.

    Published Jul 22, 2026self-described: Organization that has not approved Grok

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on 3.12.30
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-07-22, 3.12.30
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Reliability, regressions: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Grok 4.5 High Fast, GPT 5.6 Terra High

  90. Positive

    mjrbrennan, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Cursor is their daily driver at Discourse for the best AI autocomplete the commenter has used and its vim mode, while much of their agent work now runs in Codex or Claude.

    Published Jun 17, 2026self-described: Discourse

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-17
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, continuity: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  91. Positive

    presentation, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Uses Cursor primarily. Composer 2.5 is cheap and fast, and good enough that the commenter rarely picks other models. Cloud agents are easy to set up and move to local.

    Published Jun 17, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on Composer 2.5
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-17, Composer 2.5
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, ongoing upkeep: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  92. Negative

    lebed2045, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Paid US$20 for Cursor, burned through the quota in one day after a few prompts, and could not find a clear way to see the quota.

    Published Jun 17, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-17
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  93. Mixed

    rcleveng, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Still uses Cursor for Composer 2.5's price to quality, Linear assignment, and Bugbot finds others miss, but its usage and billing dashboards are opaque.

    Published Jun 16, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on Composer 2.5
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16, Composer 2.5
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, continuity: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  94. Negative

    laurels-marts, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Given a company Cursor license after months on Codex CLI, the commenter found the Agent Window buggy on WSL2 and kept Codex CLI as their main tool.

    Published Jun 16, 2026self-described: Company-issued Cursor license

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  95. Positive

    ghshephard, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Uses Cursor more than eight hours a day at work alongside unlimited Claude Code and Codex, mostly through agent workflows with Plan Mode on frontier models.

    Published Jun 16, 2026self-described: SRE using Cursor 8+ hours a day at work

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on Opus 4.8 High/xHigh; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16, Opus 4.8 High/xHigh
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  96. Positive

    darklinear, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Their primary tool at work. The commenter keeps agents on a tight leash most of the time and rates Cursor's autocomplete the best available. They find its cloud agents better than Claude Code's or Codex's.

    Published Jun 16, 2026self-described: Data and platform engineering at work

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Observed on GPT-5.5 and Composer 2.5; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16, GPT-5.5 and Composer 2.5
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    GPT-5.5 and Composer 2.5

  97. Negative

    renjimen, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    For their ML work, Auto routed hard tasks to Composer without saying which model it chose, so the commenter redid work on expensive frontier models; model choice is their main quality control.

    Published Jun 16, 2026self-described: Machine learning work

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on Auto
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-16, Auto
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, models and deployment: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  98. Positive

    Yash Patel, former software engineer and tech writer at XDA Developers

    I stopped using Cursor to write code, and that's when it actually became usefulFirst-person review column, XDA Developers

    Large generated features cost them review and correction time, so Patel switched to asking Cursor to explain code, trace bugs and map dependencies, where it saves the most time.

    Published Jun 14, 2026self-described: Own development projects

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-14
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  99. Positive

    dpcan, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: AI coding at home without going brokeHacker News comment

    On the US$60 plan with Auto the commenter has never come close to their included usage despite evenings of planning and coding, and finds Auto's output strong for their tasks.

    Published Jun 13, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Observed on $60 per month Cursor plan on auto; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-06-13, $60 per month Cursor plan on auto
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Pro Plus (US$60 per month), Auto

  100. Negative

    jorl17, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5Hacker News comment

    Cannot warm to Composer's terse style, and once had composer2-fast accidentally run rm -rf $HOME from a bug in an install script it wrote.

    Published May 19, 2026self-described: Python, Bash and Docker work

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on composer2-fast; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-05-19, composer2-fast
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  101. Negative

    enraged_camel, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5Hacker News comment

    Testing Composer 2.5 on refactors and features, Codex and Opus reviews found mismatched patterns, hallucinated names and bugs in every plan; fast, but below Cursor's benchmark claims.

    Published May 19, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on Composer 2
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-05-19, Composer 2
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Composer 2.5

  102. Positive

    darkwi11ow, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5Hacker News comment

    Has used the US$20 plan daily for over a year without exhausting it, because the commenter reviews and often rewrites the output by hand and avoids prompt loops.

    Published May 18, 2026self-described: Software engineer in Kyiv

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on $20 plan
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-05-18, $20 plan
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    US$20 plan with separate pools for third-party and Cursor models

  103. Positive

    newtwilly, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for US$60BHacker News comment

    Uses company-paid Cursor for its GUI over running agents and to switch between OpenAI and Anthropic models and sizes, picking the cheapest model that can do the job.

    Published Apr 22, 2026self-described: Employer pays for Cursor and a ChatGPT Enterprise seat

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Observed on 5.4-nano; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-22, 5.4-nano
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  104. Negative

    verelo, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Switching from Cursor to Claude cut their monthly spend from US$1,800 to US$200, and the commenter now alternates Claude and Codex for under a quarter of their December cost.

    Published Apr 3, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-03
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Current

  105. Positive

    athoscouto, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    On the enterprise plan, Composer 2 replaced auto mode as their default for price and intuition, though it gets stuck on complex tasks and the commenter steps in or switches models.

    Published Apr 3, 2026self-described: On a Cursor enterprise plan

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Observed on Composer 2
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-03, Composer 2
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Operational control, models and deployment: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Enterprise plan, Composer 2

  106. Positive

    ok_dad, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Finds Cursor's agent pipeline better at coding and much faster than Claude's, and notes it can run from GitHub without opening the IDE.

    Published Apr 3, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-03
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  107. Negative

    DeathArrow, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    On the same US$20 plan, their work account still has 500 fast requests while their personal quota runs out after about 14 Opus requests. The commenter plans to switch for personal use.

    Published Apr 3, 2026self-described: Uses the $20 plan at work and at home

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on $20 plan
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-03, $20 plan
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    US$20 plan, legacy 500 fast requests at work, Opus 4.6

  108. Mixed

    seamossfet, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Uses Cursor over Claude Code because they still want to code, and dislikes a design direction that makes a chat interface the first class citizen and the code a secondary concern.

    Published Apr 2, 2026self-described: Works on CAD for drug discovery

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-02
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  109. Positive

    rvshchwl, product manager, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    A product manager without coding experience uses Cursor's side browser to point at components, and values multiple models and switchable MCP integrations such as Jira and Grafana.

    Published Apr 2, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-02
    Not counted
    Operational control, models and deployment: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  110. Negative

    nu11ptr, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Runs Claude Code inside Cursor one task at a time with Cursor completions, has no interest in agent swarms, and plans to switch back to VS Code with Claude Code.

    Published Apr 2, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-02
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  111. Negative

    Gimpei, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 3Hacker News comment

    Kept hitting their Pro limit, so the commenter now uses Claude Code with the free Cursor plan for autocomplete and sees little value left in paying for Cursor.

    Published Apr 2, 2026

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Observed on pro-cursor subscription
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-04-02, pro-cursor subscription
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  112. Negative

    genthree, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cook: A simple CLI for orchestrating Claude CodeHacker News comment

    Their company tracks Cursor usage so the commenter cannot avoid it, though its autocomplete is less useful to them than VS Code's and it gets processes OOM-killed on a 16GB laptop.

    Published Mar 19, 2026self-described: Employer tracks Cursor usage

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-03-19
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  113. Negative

    Eric Roby, backend engineer and educator

    I Canceled My Cursor Subscription After a Year. Here's Why.Newsletter, Brain Bytes (Substack)

    After a year Roby canceled Cursor: it never understood the whole project, and once Claude Code ran in the terminal, Cursor was only for reviewing diffs, then not at all.

    Published Mar 10, 2026self-described: Own backend projects

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed); customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-03-10
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    One-year Cursor subscription, then Claude Code Max

  114. Negative

    Ife (ifedapoolarewaju), Cursor user

    Cursor Keeps Auto-Accepting Its Own ChangesCursor forum post

    The agent accepts some of its own multi-edit changes before the poster can review them, and a February 2026 release removed the setting that had stopped it.

    Published Feb 18, 2026self-described: Multi-root workspace

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; structured test; counts toward Reliability, Operational control, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Ran a structured test; Specific details; Observed on Version: 2.5.17 (Universal)
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-18, Version: 2.5.17 (Universal)
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Reliability, regressions: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, continuity: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  115. Mixed

    Luisa, Bugbot user

    Bugbot doesn't catch all issues on first pass: multiple review cycles neededCursor forum post

    Bugbot surfaces issues one pass at a time, flagging bugs present in the original code only after each fix, which forces repeated push and review cycles.

    Published Feb 10, 2026self-described: Pull request review

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-02-10
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Bugbot

  116. Mixed

    Prasad Subrahmanya, Cloud agents user

    Cloud Agents + Multiple Repositories (non-monorepo setup)Cursor forum post

    Uses Cursor Cloud Agents in the browser with code split across frontend, backend, mobile and docs repositories; found each agent must target a single repository and cannot clone or access the others, and asks whether multi-repo access is intentionally unsupported.

    Published Jan 22, 2026self-described: Codebase split across frontend, backend, mobile and docs repositories

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-22
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  117. Positive

    Gagandeep Singh, Senior Engineer at Branch International

    How Cursor boosted my productivity in 2025Personal blog post, Gagandeep's Blog (gagan93.me)

    After almost a year on Cursor, Singh mixes Sonnet, Opus and Composer, hit slowdowns as the context window filled before automatic summarization arrived, works in smaller diffs to review generated code fully, and launches background agents by tagging @cursor on Linear tickets.

    Published Jan 18, 2026self-described: Branch International, backend Ruby refactoring and rewrites; organization uses Copilot and Cursor

    Practitioner account; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability, Operational control, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Observed on Composer-1; Specific details
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-18, Composer-1
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Reliability, service availability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Auto mode, then Sonnet, Opus and Composer 1

  118. Negative

    Sage Choi, software engineer

    I Stopped Using Cursor, Here's WhyPersonal blog post, Sage Choi (Substack)

    Stopped using Cursor because its bundled, opinionated workflow created cognitive lock-in; the real value was multi-model access through the Cursor CLI, which other tools now match.

    Published Jan 9, 2026self-described: Sage Choi's Substack newsletter

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Operational control, Cost predictability and limits, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-09
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, ongoing upkeep: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current
    Observed on
    Cursor CLI

  119. Mixed

    emanuelgrammenos, Cursor user for two years

    Cursor US$200 vs. Claude Max + Cursor: Usage Limits and Trade-offsCursor forum post

    Even on the US$200 plan the poster hit the usage limit three to five days before renewal, so they now pair Cursor Pro with Claude Max and runs Claude Code inside Cursor.

    Published Jan 8, 2026self-described: Cursor community forum, two years of use

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on Cursor $200
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-08, Cursor $200
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Pro, US$60 and US$200 plans, then Pro plus Claude Max

  120. Positive

    Sepehr Khosravi, machine learning platform engineer, Coinbase

    AI Native Dev: What AI Engineering Looks Like at Meta, Coinbase, ServiceTitan and ThoughtWorksPodcast episode video

    A Coinbase platform engineer does 80 to 90% of his work in Cursor, which he finds faster, lighter on tokens and able to switch models, and starts deep tasks in Claude Code beside it.

    "I think my ideal environment is Cursor IDE set up with Claude Code on my terminal, and that's where I feel I'm the most productive. I'll kind of use Cursor for most of the things actually, like 80 to 90% of the things I'm doing on Cursor. But for deep tasks, I will start off my task with asking Claude Code."
    Transcript excerpt, Sepehr Khosravi (automatic captions), at 3:28

    Published Jan 6, 2026self-described: Coinbase, which tracks AI use per developer

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  121. Mixed

    mikail (ju5ti5e), Cursor Pro subscriber

    Cursor Pro: Auto Mode "Unlimited" usage no longer feels unlimitedCursor forum post

    On Pro, Auto mode described as unlimited now stops responding or seems throttled without a clear error, and the poster asks Cursor to explain how its limits work.

    Published Jan 5, 2026self-described: Cursor community forum, Pro plan

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Observed on Cursor Pro
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-05, Cursor Pro
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Pro plan, Auto mode

  122. Negative

    Anton Morgunov, researcher and developer

    Vibe coding killed CursorPersonal blog post, ischemist.com (Anton Morgunov)

    A Cursor user since March 2024 stopped using it, arguing agent-driven vibe coding is token-inefficient and expensive; Morgunov prefers staying in charge with OpenCode or AI Studio.

    Published Jan 1, 2026self-described: Own research code and personal apps

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2026-01-01
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  123. Positive

    santoriv, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Graphite is joining CursorHacker News comment

    Composer 1 matches the code quality of the frontier models the commenter switches between at about four times the speed, so the model now waits on them.

    Published Dec 19, 2025self-described: Large enterprise company

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on composer-1
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-12-19, composer-1
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Composer 1, Gemini Flash 3, Opus 4.5, Sonnet 4.5, GPT 5.2

  124. Mixed

    Shane Chang, full-stack engineer running an AI startup

    Cursor Is Brilliant, And Here's Why I Still Hate Using ItPersonal blog post, Shane's Personal Blog (shanechang.com)

    Praises Cursor's retrieval and context understanding, but exhausted their quota two-thirds through a month and found its opaque token pricing and opinionated behavior a constant mental load.

    Published Dec 19, 2025self-described: Own startup, type-strict Python codebase

    Practitioner account; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability, Operational control, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Used it directly; Specific details
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-12-19
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, limits in practice: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-origin, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: mixed, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Reliability, run stability: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  125. No opinion stated

    Laura Tacho, host of the Engineering Enablement podcast at DX

    Running data-driven evaluations of AI engineering toolsPodcast episode transcript, Engineering Enablement podcast (DX)

    Laura Tacho personally prefers Claude Code and feels much more productive with it than with Cursor or a different tool, calling that a personal preference and saying developers will have their own.

    "I know I personally prefer to use claude code. I feel much more productive with claude code than I do, for example, with Cursor or with a different tool. That’s just my personal preference."
    Excerpt, Laura Tacho

    Published Dec 12, 2025Developer productivity research across DX customer companies

    not counted until substantiated How GILD checked it
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-12-12
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, measured outcomes: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Current

  126. Negative

    Patrik Kelemen, founder of Namiru.ai

    Why I Switched from Cursor to Claude Code (And Cut My AI Costs by 10x)Founder blog post, Namiru.ai blog

    After token-based pricing their Cursor bill reached US$830 in one month using Opus 4.5, so Kelemen moved the same workload to a US$80 to US$200 Claude Max plan.

    Published Dec 9, 2025self-described: Own product development

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on Sonnet 4.5 and the new Opus 4.5
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, author profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-12-09, Sonnet 4.5 and the new Opus 4.5
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Token-based Cursor pricing, Sonnet 4.5 and Opus 4.5

  127. Negative

    HungHo (user129), Cursor user since the 0.x versions

    Stop Shipping Unstable BuildsCursor forum post

    A long-time user now hesitates to update because almost every release since 2.0 breaks something; the poster pinned 2.0.69 after 2.0.7x broke SSH connections.

    Published Nov 18, 2025self-described: Daily use, including remote work over SSH

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Reliability, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on 2.0.7x
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-18, 2.0.7x
    Counts toward
    Reliability, regressions: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, ongoing upkeep: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Pinned to Cursor 2.0.69

  128. Positive

    Emi Buliga, solo startup developer

    Cursor has literally changed my lifeCursor forum post

    Six days after moving to the Ultra plan, their 30k-line startup codebase grew as much as it used to in two weeks, with Cursor finding business-logic bugs across many files.

    Published Nov 14, 2025self-described: Solo startup, about 30k lines of code

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on Cursor Ultra plan
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-14, Cursor Ultra plan
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Ultra plan

  129. Negative

    Antti Kojo, Cursor user

    Is there better tool out there than cursor?Cursor forum post

    Recent updates made Cursor too agentic for them: agents ignore instructions and start editing when asked to search, so reverting bad changes burns credits fast.

    Published Nov 12, 2025self-described: Software development

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability, Operational control, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-12
    Counts toward
    Reliability, regressions: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  130. Negative

    Ignacio Ferreira, Cursor Ultra subscriber

    Visual indication that you are using Max Mode, spent a ton of money without noticing in Max ModeCursor forum post

    Spent 300 credits beyond their Ultra plan after Max Mode was switched on without a visible indicator, and asks for a clear one.

    Published Nov 12, 2025self-described: Linux

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Observed on Ultra plan
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-11-12, Ultra plan
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Ultra plan, Max Mode

  131. Negative

    John Collins, Cursor user

    2.0: A step in the wrong directionCursor forum post

    Argues Cursor 2.0 puts the agent front and center and pulls them away from their code, when the poster valued an assistant on call plus autocomplete.

    Published Oct 30, 2025self-described: Own projects

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-30, 2.0, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, continuity: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor 2.0

  132. Mixed

    hime, Cursor user and dashboard author

    I made a dashboard to track actual costs after Sept 15 pricingCursor forum post

    After the September 2025 pricing change the poster built their own cost dashboard because Cursor's did not show projected spend; Sonnet 4 turned out to be 80% of their costs.

    Published Oct 19, 2025self-described: Cursor community forum, individual account

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Cost predictability and limits How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-19, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Pricing after September 15, 2025; Sonnet 4

  133. Negative

    singularityskynet, Cursor user

    Why the push for Agentic when models can barely follow a single simple instruction?Cursor forum post

    Questions agentic and background coding when GPT-5 and Gemini Pro in Cursor could not update one 100-line Go function to match a reference without omissions.

    Published Oct 13, 2025self-described: Go codebase

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-13, gpt5 and gemini pro, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance, C-relationship

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    GPT-5 and Gemini Pro

  134. Positive

    Reilly Chase, independent builder

    I played 1,000 hands of online poker and built a web app with Cursor AIPersonal blog post, blog.rchase.com

    Built and deployed a Laravel poker stats app with dozens of features in two or three days through conversations with Cursor's agent, without writing a line of code themselves.

    Published Oct 8, 2025self-described: Solo, Laravel side project

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-10-08, Claude 4.5 Sonnet Thinking, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  135. Positive

    Andrej Karpathy, AI researcher and former Director of AI at Tesla

    X post: "Continuing the journey of optimal LLM-assisted coding experience"X post

    About 75% of Karpathy's LLM coding help is Cursor tab completion, because writing code in the right place is the fastest way to tell the model what he wants.

    "Personally the bread & butter (~75%?) of my LLM assistance continues to be just (Cursor) tab complete. This is because I find that writing concrete chunks of code/comments myself and in the right part of the code is a high bandwidth way of communicating…"
    Excerpt, Andrej Karpathy

    Published Aug 24, 2025self-described: Own coding projects

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, takes no position How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, author profile, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-24, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    no aspect: excluded, takes no position on any assessed aspect

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor Tab, with Claude Code and Codex beside Cursor

  136. Positive

    Mitch Alderson, software engineer writing on the Render blog

    Testing AI coding agents (2025): Cursor vs. Claude, OpenAI, and GeminiIndependent benchmark, Render blog

    Testing Cursor (with Claude Sonnet 4), Claude Code, Gemini CLI and Codex on a vibe coded app and two large existing repos, Alderson gave Cursor the top average score, was most impressed overall with it, and calls its in-editor autocomplete an extraordinary force-multiplier in production.

    "For myself, I was most impressed overall with Cursor. I thought it was just a VSCode re-skin utilizing other companies' models, but it's a great tool!"
    Excerpt, Mitch Alderson

    Published Aug 12, 2025self-described: Production codebases at Render and a client site

    Practitioner account; structured test; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control, Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Ran a structured test; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-12, Claude Sonnet 4, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Claude Sonnet 4 in Cursor for every test

  137. Negative

    Quentin Anthony, METR study participant working on GPT-NeoX

    Unpacking METR's findings: Does AI slow developers down?Podcast episode, Engineering Enablement podcast (DX)

    A METR study participant avoids Cursor because they cannot see what happens to the context, and want full control over what they feed the model.

    "And while Cursor is nice in that I don’t have ever have to leave my editor, I don’t really know what’s happening to the context. And it’s already a bit of a challenge, I mentioned this a bit in my Twitter thread,…"
    Excerpt, Quentin AnthonyPartial support

    Published Aug 1, 2025self-described: Open source GPT-NeoX development

    Practitioner account; opinion; not counted until substantiated How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Opinion; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Opinion, no use stated
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-08-01, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Published on
    Podcasts, Talks & Videos
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  138. No opinion stated

    METR, independent AI research nonprofit

    Measuring the Impact of Early-2025 AI on Experienced Open-Source Developer ProductivityResearch paper, arXiv (METR randomized controlled trial)

    In METR's randomized trial, experienced open-source developers took 19% longer on real issues when allowed AI tools such as Cursor Pro, while expecting a speedup.

    "Experts and study participants (experienced open-source contributors) substantially overestimate how much AI assistance will speed up developers, tasks take 19% more time when study participants can use AI tools like Cursor Pro."
    Excerpt, METR

    Published Jul 25, 2025self-described: 16 experienced open-source developers on 246 real issues in their own repositories

    Practitioner account; structured test; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Customer of Cursor; Ran a structured test; Artifact checked (benchmark output); Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    1 artifact (benchmark output)
    Date and version
    2025-07-25, Cursor Pro with Claude 3.5/3.7 Sonnet, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, measured outcomes: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Cursor Pro with Claude 3.5 and 3.7 Sonnet, February to June 2025

  139. Mixed

    Domenic Denicola, sole active maintainer of jsdom

    My Participation in the METR AI Productivity StudyPersonal blog post, domenic.me

    As a METR study participant on jsdom Denicola mostly used Cursor's agent mode; two AI-allowed tasks ran hours over estimate, and the agent was bad at matching the codebase's style.

    Published Jul 15, 2025self-described: jsdom, an open source codebase of about 1 million lines, in a randomized study

    Practitioner account, self-described; structured test; not counted, from a competitor's side How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Competitor staff: not counted as independent; Ran a structured test; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    competitor employee (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Ran a structured test
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-07-15, "auto" (Claude Sonnet 3.5, I believe?), Claude Sonnet 3.7 (thinking mode), or gemini-2.5-pro-exp-03-25, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, measured outcomes: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: excluded, criticism from a competitor's side, kept as an attributed position

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Measured
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Cursor agent mode with auto, Claude Sonnet 3.7 thinking, or Gemini 2.5 Pro

  140. Mixed

    paulmist, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Measuring the impact of AI on experienced open-source developer productivityHacker News comment

    When Cursor picks the wrong library or ignores project functions the commenter rejects and re-prompts; a well-crafted repo prompt mitigates most of this on large projects.

    Published Jul 10, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-07-10, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  141. Negative

    cadamsdotcom, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Measuring the impact of AI on experienced open-source developer productivityHacker News comment

    Canceled Cursor for Claude Code because the commenter did not want to approve every line and prefers reviewing whole diffs and steering the agent's approach.

    Published Jul 10, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-07-10, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  142. Negative

    mellosouls, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Clarifying our pricingHacker News comment

    An annual-plan subscriber calls the new pricing classic enshittification of the formerly premium options and says the only way to get what they paid for is an opt-out in Advanced Settings, which should be on by default.

    Published Jul 5, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-07-05, annual plan, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost predictability: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Cost predictability and limits, cost transparency: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck

  143. Mixed

    Andres Crucetta, software developer

    Why I stopped using cursorPersonal blog post, andresc.bearblog.dev

    Cursor's autocomplete and agents let them finish tickets and debug faster, but Crucetta deleted it to keep learning, after realizing they had stopped thinking about the code they shipped.

    Published Jun 20, 2025self-described: Work tickets and personal programming

    Practitioner account; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-20, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relationship, C-unknown-control

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  144. Positive

    ai_assisted_dev, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 1.0Hacker News comment

    Spends US$10 to 20 a day on extra Cursor requests with Claude 4 and still prefers it to Claude Code, justifying the cost against their own paying services.

    Published Jun 5, 2025self-described: Own services with paying customers

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Reliability How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; Customer of Cursor; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    customer (self disclosed)
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-05, Claude 4 (non-max / non-thinking), needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Reliability, service availability: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: mixed, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward, pending a recheck

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Needs a recheck
    Observed on
    Claude 4 (non-max, non-thinking)

  145. Negative

    dkersten, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 1.0Hacker News comment

    Stopped using Cursor for Zed's agent mode because Cursor leaked memory even with every extension removed.

    Published Jun 5, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-05, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Reliability, run stability: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  146. Positive

    luckyandroid, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 1.0Hacker News comment

    Values Cursor Tab for replicating a change across the next 50 lines more than agent back-and-forth, using agents mainly for setup and boilerplate.

    Published Jun 5, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-05, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  147. Positive

    jjice, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 1.0Hacker News comment

    After correcting the agent's style or structure mistakes the commenter has it write a Cursor rule so it avoids them next time, which helps when it works.

    Published Jun 5, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-05, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  148. Positive

    adastra22, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 1.0Hacker News comment

    Switched from Copilot in VS Code to Cursor specifically because Cursor's tab completion was far more accurate.

    Published Jun 5, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-05, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  149. Negative

    jimrandomh, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 1.0Hacker News comment

    Struggles to use Cursor because sideloaded and forked VS Code extensions that work in VS Code fail to load in Cursor, with no documentation.

    Published Jun 5, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Adoption and upkeep How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-05, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Adoption and upkeep, setup: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  150. Mixed

    cmrx64, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Cursor 1.0Hacker News comment

    Uses Cursor's agent on self-contained, well-specified Rust components with plenty of grounding context, and accepts spending time fixing mistakes the commenter would not make.

    Published Jun 5, 2025self-described: Solo, Rust distributed-systems components

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-05, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  151. Mixed

    nsingh2, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Cursor 1.0Hacker News comment

    Most extensions the commenter uses are on Open VSX, but Cursor's VS Code base lags months behind, leaving them on older extension versions.

    Published Jun 4, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-06-04, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Adoption and upkeep, ongoing upkeep: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  152. Negative

    Alberto Fortin, software engineer of 15 years and SaaS founder

    After months of coding with LLMs, I'm going back to using my brainPersonal blog post, albertofortin.com

    After weeks of letting Cursor write his Go rewrite, Fortin reviewed the code and found duplicated services, inconsistent names and no overarching plan. It read as if ten developers had worked without seeing each other's code.

    "No consistency, no overarching plan. It’s like I'd asked 10 junior-mid developers to work on this codebase, with no Git access, locking them in a room without seeing what the other 9 were doing."
    Excerpt, Alberto Fortin

    Published May 15, 2025self-described: Solo SaaS, rewrite from PHP and MySQL to Go and ClickHouse

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-15, Gemini, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  153. Positive

    fastball, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?Hacker News comment

    Daily drives Cursor for tab completion, which predicts their next multi-line and multi-file edit about 95% of the time; agent results depend on the model.

    Published May 12, 2025self-described: Engineer at Known, co-founder of Supernotes

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-12, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  154. Mixed

    whywhywhywhy, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?Hacker News comment

    Uses Cursor for basic work but finds it lazy about looking beyond the current context, switching to Windsurf when it fails.

    Published May 12, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months; Specific details
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-12, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds)
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  155. Negative

    rco8786, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?Hacker News comment

    Realized Cursor was slowing them down because subtle bugs in generated code lengthened the pull request cycle, and went back to VS Code with Copilot.

    Published May 12, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-12, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  156. Positive

    nlh, Hacker News commenter

    Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?Hacker News comment

    Uses Cursor as their editor for inline edits and the best tab completion the commenter has tried, with Cline running Gemini 2.5 as the agent.

    Published May 12, 2025self-described: Self-taught developer and full-time rare coin dealer

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-12, Claude 3.7, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: repeats a stronger account in its group
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 30, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Claude 3.7 for inline edits

  157. Mixed

    chironjit, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?Hacker News comment

    After months on Cursor the commenter dislikes agent mode for overcomplicating and producing code to accept blindly, and switched back to autocomplete and ask mode.

    Published May 12, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-12, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  158. Negative

    w4, Hacker News commenter, self-described

    Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?Hacker News comment

    Says Cursor's bugs and tab completion performance regressions led them to disable completions and try alternatives. A plugin setup (CodeCompanion with Gemini 2.5 for chat, Copilot for completion) mostly replicates the Cursor functionality they used routinely, mostly on their own API keys.

    Published May 12, 2025

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; not counted, repeats a stronger account How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-05-12, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Reliability, regressions: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  159. Positive

    Gergely Orosz, author of The Pragmatic Engineer, formerly at Uber and Skype

    X post: "One very surprising thing I'm noticing"X post

    Orosz no longer codes every day, yet with Windsurf and Cursor and recent models he is back to the speed he had when he coded daily.

    "Despite being rusty with coding (I don't code every day these days): since starting to use Windsurf / Cursor with the recent increasingly capable models: I am SO back to being as fast in coding as when I was coding every day…"
    Excerpt, Gergely Orosz

    Published Apr 23, 2025self-described: Own side projects and APIs

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, author profile, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-04-23, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  160. Mixed

    smallyu, Go developer

    People Who Hype Cursor Usually Lack Technical SkillsPersonal blog post, smallyu's Blog (en.smallyu.net)

    Finds Cursor's completion no better than Copilot's but credits it for searching project files on its own; it also creates files without consent, so the author watches its edits.

    Published Apr 12, 2025self-described: Work codebase, Go and smart contracts

    Practitioner account; opinion; not counted until substantiated How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Opinion; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name unknown; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Opinion, no use stated
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-04-12, needs a recheck
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated
    Not counted
    Operational control, execution control: a lead (G0), counts toward nothing until substantiated

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

  161. Positive

    Andrej Karpathy, AI researcher and former Director of AI at Tesla

    X post: "There's a new kind of coding I call vibe coding"X post

    Karpathy coined vibe coding for building throwaway weekend projects by talking to Cursor Composer with Sonnet, accepting every change and no longer reading the diffs.

    "It's possible because the LLMs (e.g. Cursor Composer w Sonnet) are getting too good. Also I just talk to Composer with SuperWhisper so I barely even touch the keyboard."
    Excerpt, Andrej Karpathy

    Published Feb 2, 2025self-described: Throwaway weekend projects

    Practitioner account, pseudonymous; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Pseudonymous; No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check; Used it directly; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Pseudonymous account; identity not pursued
    Relationship
    No tie to Cursor found in GILD's check (byline, content disclosure, author profile, platform api profile); that is not proof none exists
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-02-02, Cursor Composer w Sonnet, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G1 (1 unit before bounds), capped: C-relevance

    Checked Oct 29, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Developer Communities
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable
    Observed on
    Cursor Composer with Claude Sonnet

  162. Positive

    Zohaib Rauf, engineering manager writing about their side projects

    Using LLMs and Cursor to become a finisherPersonal blog post, zohaib.me

    An engineering manager finishes side projects with Cursor by writing a spec first, saving it as SPEC.md for the agent to refer back to, and building in small steps.

    Published Jan 2, 2025self-described: Solo, greenfield side projects

    Practitioner account, self-described; direct use; counts toward Delivered outcomes, Operational control How GILD checked it
    Origin
    Published practitioner account
    Checked
    Self-described; Used it directly; Specific details; Needs recheck after 12 months
    Role
    Name self-described; employer unknown; role unknown
    Relationship
    Checked only from the record itself; an outside check is open
    How they know
    Used it directly
    Support
    No artifact or independent corroboration recorded
    Date and version
    2025-01-02, Claude-3.5-Sonnet, needs a recheck
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, task completion: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Delivered outcomes, correctness: unfavorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, execution control: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Counts toward
    Operational control, models and deployment: favorable, G2 (2 units before bounds), capped: C-relationship
    Not counted
    Delivered outcomes, context handling: repeats a stronger account in its group

    Checked Oct 31, 2026 under gild-policy/1.0.0. The scorecard

    Counts toward

    Published on
    Engineering Blogs & Reviews
    Who
    Individual practitioner
    Evidence
    Reported
    Applies to
    Still applicable

Product documentation 21

Pages from Cursor, used to check facts for every group.

  1. Models & Pricing

    Lists models from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, SpaceXAI, and Cursor. Each X Subscription plan includes one weekly pool for Cursor's own models, shared with Grok; third-party models bill at API list price from prepaid credit. Legacy plans keep two monthly pools, Cursor Models and Other Models.

    Checked Oct 28, 2026

  2. Team Pricing

    Documents Premium (US$30), Super (US$100), and Ultra (US$200) seats per user per month, a prepaid team balance with a monthly additional usage limit, a default per-member limit and per-member overrides, and the Cursor Token Rate on third-party models. Legacy Standard (US$40) and Premium (US$120) seats keep on-demand usage, on by default.

    Checked Oct 28, 2026

  3. Team Dashboard

    Documents team privacy and spending settings, plus device-level enforcement and the AI Code Tracking API on Enterprise.

    Checked Oct 28, 2026

  4. Cursor Router

    Explains Auto routing on Teams and Enterprise: a classifier sends each agent request to the most cost-effective model for the task, steered by an optimization mode.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  5. Agent

    Describes Agent, which runs terminal commands and edits code to complete tasks, with Projects that coordinate larger bodies of work.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  6. Plan Mode

    Documents Plan Mode, which researches the codebase and asks clarifying questions before writing an editable plan.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  7. Agent Security

    Documents approval defaults: terminal commands and MCP tool calls need approval. Run Modes are best-effort guardrails, and Cursor says they are no security boundary.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  8. Rules

    Documents Project Rules in .cursor/rules, User Rules, Team Rules on Team and Enterprise plans, and AGENTS.md.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  9. Hooks

    Documents hooks that observe, block, or modify the agent loop, for example to scan for secrets or gate risky operations.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  10. Cloud Agents

    Describes agents that run in isolated cloud VMs with full development environments, in parallel and across multiple repositories.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  11. Cloud Agents security overview

    Explains how cloud agents are isolated and how they are granted access, written for teams evaluating them against security requirements.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  12. Bugbot

    Documents Bugbot pull request review on GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, and Origin, run on every update or on request.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  13. Agent Review

    Documents Agent Review, a dedicated review of local changes inside Cursor that reads the same BUGBOT.md rules.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  14. Cursor CLI

    Documents the Cursor CLI for running agents from the terminal, interactively or in scripts and CI.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  15. Privacy and Data Governance

    States that Privacy Mode is on by default only for Enterprise and can be enforced team-wide; cloud agents are the only feature that stores code.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  16. Usage Analytics

    Documents usage analytics on the web dashboard for Team and Enterprise, with API access for Enterprise.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  17. SSO

    Documents SAML 2.0 single sign-on at no extra cost on Teams and Enterprise plans.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  18. VS Code Migration

    Explains that Cursor is based on the VS Code codebase and imports extensions, themes, settings, and keybindings.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  19. JetBrains

    Documents running Cursor's agent inside JetBrains IDEs through the Agent Client Protocol on paid plans.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  20. Origin

    Documents Origin, Cursor's git forge in early beta, with hosted repositories and GitHub mirroring.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

  21. Security

    States Cursor's SOC 2 Type II attestation and its ISO and AIUC-1 certifications.

    Checked Oct 12, 2026

Source index

Provenance at a glance

Every source GILD read, with the original address and the context used to count it. Open a finding to filter the full cards above. On smaller screens the index lists each source once by name, cohort and date; its full record above carries the address, context and findings.

Provenance for every analyzed Signals source
SourceOriginal URLAuthor and contextWhoPublishedReview dateAppliesFindings
Post on X: a cloud agent burned through UltraID sf-14 | Developer Communitiesx.com/darthnugget/status/2115214989132964159Darth (@darthnugget), X userself-described: Solo, Cursor Ultra with cloud agentsIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 27, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Post on X: Cursor cuts autonomous runs shortID sf-17 | Developer Communitiesx.com/aryaniyaps/status/2115060432348320095Aryan Iyappan (@aryaniyaps), X userself-described: SoloIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 27, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Comment on Hacker News: tooling is not a moat for developersID sf-18 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=50261642nrclark, Hacker News commenterself-described: Solo developerIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 27, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Comment on r/cursor: Ultra credit wording removedID sf-11 | Developer Communitieswww.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1xg80wj/x/19rp6rkrdl3ic/usernamedotjs, Reddit r/cursor commenter on the Ultra planself-described: Solo, Claude models on UltraIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 26, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Help me understand my token usageID sf-13 | Developer Communitieswww.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1xft9ti/liftershifter, Reddit r/cursor posterself-described: Solo, Claude Opus 5.5 at 300k contextIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 26, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Comment on Hacker News: routing work to a cheaper modelID sf-19 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=50251451boogiefromzk, Hacker News commenterself-described: SoloIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 26, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Cursor Ultra "Cursor Models" finished in one weekID sf-8 | Developer Communitieswww.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1xfsrys/Smart-Apartment-4089, Reddit r/cursor poster on Cursor Ultraself-described: Solo, about 30 code reviews on Grok 4.7Individual practitionerPublished Oct 26, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Post on X: side-tracking burned a third of the monthID sf-16 | Developer Communitiesx.com/redgreenbl35768/status/2114426831176958167redgreenblue (@redgreenbl35768), X userself-described: SoloIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 25, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
The US$20 plan on Composer and Auto on r/cursorID sf-10 | Developer Communitieswww.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1xe5rzo/Initial_Promotion511, Reddit r/cursor posterself-described: Solo daily developmentIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 24, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Comment on r/cursor: credits paid for, not receivedID sf-12 | Developer Communitieswww.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1xdbl2n/x/19rj9fa30oyps/PewDiePwnn, Reddit r/cursor commenterself-described: Solo, bought creditsIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 23, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Post on X: a day with Cursor on PremiumID sf-15 | Developer Communitiesx.com/markh137/status/2113694373703516476MarkH (@markh137), X userself-described: Solo, Cursor PremiumIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 23, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Legacy Ultra bill on r/cursorID sf-9 | Developer Communitieswww.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1xcw4i6/chrislonardo, Reddit r/cursor poster on the legacy Ultra planself-described: Solo, heavy use on the legacy US$200 Ultra planIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 22, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Its author's ties to the vendor have not been checked.
Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXID dc-95 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49511834Anamon, Hacker News commenterself-described: Employer trialed every major provider, then votedProfessional teamPublished Aug 31, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentListed, no finding position
Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXID dc-91 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49486277charrondev, Hacker News commenterself-described: Uses Cursor at work and for personal projectsIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 29, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXID dc-92 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49487167rippeltippel, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 29, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXID dc-93 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49487264fy20, Hacker News commenter, self-describedProfessional teamPublished Aug 29, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Our decision on Cursor following its acquisition by SpaceXID dc-94 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49490294zxspectrum1982, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company moved devs from Cursor to Claude and Codex directProfessional teamPublished Aug 29, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
How Superhuman Scaled AI Coding Agents Across Their Entire Eng OrgID sf-2 | Podcasts, Talks & Videoswww.youtube.com/watch?v=BlbaZYBXFyIYaroslav (Yarik), tech lead for the coding-agent rollout, Superhumanself-described: Superhuman, formerly Grammarly, engineering organizationOrganization-widePublished Aug 18, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentNot counted. Superhuman took part in an early Claude Code beta that Anthropic offered it.
Comment on: Cursor removed cost information from the usage page and CSV exportID dc-90 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49136946jkukul, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 1, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Show HN: How well do you use Claude Code?ID dc-89 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=49046915tdu01, Hacker News commenter who leads a teamself-described: Leads a team of senior engineers on CursorTechnical leadershipPublished Jul 25, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Cursor IDE force enabling Grok 4.5 and setting as default model, regardless of my initial selectionID dc-88 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/cursor-ide-force-enabling-grok-4-5-and-setting-as-default-model-regardless-of-my-initial-selection/166389Zak Thompson, developer at an organization with an approved model listself-described: Organization that has not approved GrokIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 22, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Reply in: Legacy Individual Plan, Max Mode RequiredID dc-87 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/legacy-individual-plan-max-mode-required/164969/79Jovan (jovanvel), early Cursor power user who brought colleagues onto Cursorself-described: Brought over 30 people, mostly from their company, onto CursorProfessional teamPublished Jul 7, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
2x the power users: How structured AI training scaled developer productivityID sx-13 | Podcasts, Talks & Videosgetdx.com/podcast/how-structured-ai-training-scaled-developer-productivity/Michael Redding, Principal Product Manager, presenting with Jeff Davis, VP of Core Infrastructure at IndeedIndeed engineering, more than 2,000 engineersOrganization-widePublished Jun 29, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Uber's journey of measuring AI impact on developer productivityID tc-02 | Podcasts, Talks & Videosgetdx.com/podcast/ubers-journey-measuring-ai-impact-on-developer-productivity/Abhishek Tibrewal, Uber, presenting with Ty Smith at DX Annualself-described: Uber engineering organizationOrganization-widePublished Jun 22, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-83 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48564945mjrbrennan, Hacker News commenterself-described: DiscourseIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 17, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-84 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48565754esalman, Hacker News commenterself-described: 20,000-employee company with a tech footprintOrganization-widePublished Jun 17, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentListed, no finding position
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-85 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48567240presentation, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 17, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-86 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48568004lebed2045, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 17, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-72 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48554711sanex, Hacker News commenter, self-describedVery small teamPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-73 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48554747trial3, Hacker News commenterself-described: Large employer that dropped Cursor for ClaudeOrganization-widePublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-74 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48557973rcleveng, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-75 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48558195laurels-marts, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company-issued Cursor licenseIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-76 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48558687joshgachnang, Hacker News commenterself-described: CTO of Flourish Health, set the team up on CursorVery small teamPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-77 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48558969bazzargh, Hacker News commenterself-described: Team that pays the bills for Claude, Cursor, GPT agents and BedrockProfessional teamPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-78 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48559650vadepaysa, Hacker News commenter, self-describedVery small teamPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-79 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48559714ghshephard, Hacker News commenterself-described: SRE using Cursor 8+ hours a day at workIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-80 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48560240darklinear, Hacker News commenterself-described: Data and platform engineering at workIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-81 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48561142rob74, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company went all in on Cursor and disabled JetBrains AIOrganization-widePublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX to buy Cursor for US$60BID dc-82 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48563140renjimen, Hacker News commenterself-described: Machine learning workIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 16, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Doubling the productivity of your engineering team using AIID sx-14 | Podcasts, Talks & Videosgetdx.com/podcast/doubling-productivity-of-your-engineering-team-using-ai/Brian Scanlan, Senior Principal Systems Engineer at IntercomIntercom R&D organizationOrganization-widePublished Jun 15, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
From AI experiments to organizational shift: Lessons from Mercari's transformationID sx-15 | Podcasts, Talks & Videosgetdx.com/podcast/from-ai-experiments-to-organizational-shift-lesssons-from-mercaris-transformation/Michael Galloway, leads Platform Engineering at MercariCompany-wide AI adoption mandate across engineering and other functionsOrganization-widePublished Jun 15, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentListed, no finding position
I stopped using Cursor to write code, and that's when it actually became usefulID ir-31 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewswww.xda-developers.com/stopped-using-cursor-to-write-code-actually-became-useful/Yash Patel, former software engineer and tech writer at XDA Developersself-described: Own development projectsIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 14, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: AI coding at home without going brokeID dc-71 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48520783dpcan, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 13, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Show HN: Boxes.dev: ditch localhost; run Claude Code and Codex in the cloudID dc-70 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48404151phsource, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company on CursorProfessional teamPublished Jun 4, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5ID dc-68 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48192269jorl17, Hacker News commenterself-described: Python, Bash and Docker workIndividual practitionerPublished May 19, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5ID dc-69 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48193131enraged_camel, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 19, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor Introduces Composer 2.5ID dc-67 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48183416darkwi11ow, Hacker News commenterself-described: Software engineer in KyivIndividual practitionerPublished May 18, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Today I've made the difficult decision to reduce the size of Coinbase by ~14%ID dc-66 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=48028151fourseventy, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company where marketing uses Cursor web agentsProfessional teamPublished May 5, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Latent Space: Applied Intuition with Peter LudwigID sf-3 | Podcasts, Talks & Videoslatent.space/p/appliedintuition/Peter Ludwig, co-founder and chief technology officer, Applied Intuitionself-described: Applied Intuition, company-wide tool use with an internal adoption leaderboardOrganization-widePublished Apr 27, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
An AI Agent Just Destroyed Our Production Data. It Confessed in Writing.ID ld-02 | Developer Communitiesx.com/lifeofjer/status/2048103471019434248Jeremy Crane, founder and CEO of PocketOSself-described: Software for car rental businesses; Cursor agent with Railway infrastructureTechnical leadershipPublished Apr 25, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: SpaceX says it has agreement to acquire Cursor for US$60BID dc-65 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47866327newtwilly, Hacker News commenterself-described: Employer pays for Cursor and a ChatGPT Enterprise seatIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 22, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Latent Space: Shopify with Mikhail ParakhinID sf-5 | Podcasts, Talks & Videoslatent.space/p/shopify/Mikhail Parakhin, chief technology officer, Shopifyself-described: Shopify, every employee chooses their coding toolOrganization-widePublished Apr 22, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Cursor | Technology Radar | ThoughtworksID sx-04 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewswww.thoughtworks.com/radar/tools/cursorThoughtworks Technology Radar, April 2026 editionGlobal software consultancy delivery teamsOrganization-widePublished Apr 15, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-57 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47621884dominicholmes, Hacker News commenterself-described: Team of heavy Conductor users running parallel agentsVery small teamPublished Apr 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-58 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47622001verelo, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-59 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47622041athoscouto, Hacker News commenterself-described: On a Cursor enterprise planIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-60 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47622599dirtbag__dad, Hacker News commenterself-described: Team weighing Cursor spend against hiring an engineerVery small teamPublished Apr 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-61 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47623013ok_dad, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-62 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47623434DeathArrow, Hacker News commenterself-described: Uses the $20 plan at work and at homeIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-63 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47624581mc_escher, Hacker News commenter, self-describedVery small teamPublished Apr 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-64 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47626551Jcampuzano2, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company on an enterprise contractProfessional teamPublished Apr 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-52 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47618253seamossfet, Hacker News commenterself-described: Works on CAD for drug discoveryIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-53 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47618856rvshchwl, product manager, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-54 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47618867simplyluke, Hacker News commenterself-described: Large production codebaseVery small teamPublished Apr 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-55 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47619752nu11ptr, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Cursor 3ID dc-56 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47620790Gimpei, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Cook: A simple CLI for orchestrating Claude CodeID dc-51 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47436471genthree, Hacker News commenterself-described: Employer tracks Cursor usageIndividual practitionerPublished Mar 19, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Cursor billed us US$450 for a seat that existed for secondsID dc-50 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47381337primex, Hacker News commenterself-described: Team on a Cursor Teams planVery small teamPublished Mar 14, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Shall I implement it? NoID dc-49 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=47358510bushido, Hacker News commenter who sets tool policy at their companyself-described: Co-founder of SkipUp, who barred Cursor at the companyTechnical leadershipPublished Mar 12, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
I Canceled My Cursor Subscription After a Year. Here's Why.ID ir-30 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewscodingwithroby.substack.com/p/i-canceled-my-cursor-subscriptionEric Roby, backend engineer and educatorself-described: Own backend projectsIndividual practitionerPublished Mar 10, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
How Uber uses AI for development: inside lookID sx-12 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsnewsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/how-uber-uses-ai-for-developmentTy Smith, Principal Engineer, and Anshu Chada, Director of Engineering at Uberself-described: Uber engineering, about 3,000 people in the tech functionOrganization-widePublished Mar 10, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
AI Tooling for Software Engineers in 2026ID sx-10 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsnewsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/ai-tooling-2026Gergely Orosz, author of The Pragmatic Engineerself-described: Reader survey of software engineers and engineering leadersProfessional teamPublished Mar 3, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
This week on How I AI: 5 OpenClaw agents run my home, finances, and code & How Coinbase scaled AI to 1,000+ engineersID ld-10 | Podcasts, Talks & Videoswww.lennysnewsletter.com/p/this-week-on-how-i-ai-5-openclawChintan Turakhia, leads engineering at CoinbaseCoinbase engineering organization of more than 1,000 engineersTechnical leadershipPublished Mar 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Team Seat Management Best Practices: How Do You Handle Member Changes?ID dc-48 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/team-seat-management-best-practices-how-do-you-handle-member-changes/153016songcj, admin of an annual Cursor Team planself-described: Annual Team plan with 86 seatsProfessional teamPublished Feb 26, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Reply in: Anyone here using cursor with a team? what's been the hardest part?ID dc-45 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/anyone-here-using-cursor-with-a-team-whats-been-the-hardest-part/152031/5valentinoPereira, member of a team on a Cursor team planself-described: Team planVery small teamPublished Feb 18, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Reply in: Anyone here using cursor with a team? what's been the hardest part?ID dc-46 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/anyone-here-using-cursor-with-a-team-whats-been-the-hardest-part/152031/8Antoine Cormouls, developer at a company using Cursor on a large monorepoself-described: Company team on a huge monorepo, trunk-based developmentProfessional teamPublished Feb 18, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Cursor Keeps Auto-Accepting Its Own ChangesID dc-47 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/cursor-keeps-auto-accepting-its-own-changes/152233Ife (ifedapoolarewaju), Cursor userself-described: Multi-root workspaceIndividual practitionerPublished Feb 18, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Reply in: Anyone here using cursor with a team? what's been the hardest part?ID dc-44 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/anyone-here-using-cursor-with-a-team-whats-been-the-hardest-part/152031/3Mark Harrison, member of a team on Cursor Proself-described: Small team, most members on Cursor Pro with annual renewalsVery small teamPublished Feb 17, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Bugbot doesn't catch all issues on first pass: multiple review cycles neededID dc-43 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/bugbot-doesnt-catch-all-issues-on-first-pass-multiple-review-cycles-needed/151367Luisa, Bugbot userself-described: Pull request reviewIndividual practitionerPublished Feb 10, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentListed, no finding position
Why we're moving from Cursor to Claude Code (and why you should too)ID ir-29 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewswww.56kode.com/posts/moving-from-cursor-to-claude-code/Flavien, Lead Frontend Developerself-described: Frontend team running client and in-house projectsVery small teamPublished Feb 10, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Minions: Stripe's one-shot, end-to-end coding agentsID sx-18 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsstripe.dev/blog/minions-stripes-one-shot-end-to-end-coding-agentsAlistair Gray, software engineer at StripeStripe engineering, internal unattended coding agentsOrganization-widePublished Feb 9, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentListed, no finding position
Comment on: We mourn our craftID dc-42 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46928637cmiles74, Hacker News commenterself-described: Java projects, team with junior engineersVery small teamPublished Feb 7, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Ask HN: Has your whole engineering team gone big into AI coding? How's it going?ID dc-41 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46901435znq, SIROC venture studioself-described: SIROC, 18-person venture studioProfessional teamPublished Feb 5, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Claude Code is suddenly everywhere inside MicrosoftID dc-40 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46860912interestpiqued, Hacker News commenterself-described: Firmware teamVery small teamPublished Feb 2, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Cursor at Grab: Adoption and impactID ld-03 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.grab.com/cursor-at-grab-adoption-and-impactAkshay Misra and Karmi Nguyen, engineering blog authors at GrabGrab engineering, Southeast Asian superapp; Cursor since late 2024 beside other toolsProfessional teamPublished Jan 29, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: There is an AI code review bubbleID dc-39 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46770441disillusionist, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company that ran a multi-week Greptile trialProfessional teamPublished Jan 26, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentListed, no finding position
Speed at the Cost of Quality: How Cursor AI Increases Short-Term Velocity and Long-Term Complexity in Open-Source ProjectsID sx-01 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsarxiv.org/html/2511.04427v3Hao He, Courtney Miller, Shyam Agarwal, Christian Kästner and Bogdan Vasilescu, Carnegie Mellon Universityself-described: 806 open-source GitHub projects that adopted Cursor between January 2024 and March 2025Very small teamPublished Jan 26, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Cloud Agents + Multiple Repositories (non-monorepo setup)ID dc-38 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/cloud-agents-multiple-repositories-non-monorepo-setup/149618Prasad Subrahmanya, Cloud agents userself-described: Codebase split across frontend, backend, mobile and docs repositoriesIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 22, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
How Cursor boosted my productivity in 2025ID ir-28 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsgagan93.me/blog/2026/01/18/how-cursor-boosted-my-productivity-in-2025.htmlGagandeep Singh, Senior Engineer at Branch Internationalself-described: Branch International, backend Ruby refactoring and rewrites; organization uses Copilot and CursorIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 18, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Latent Space: Brex's AI Hail Mary, with James ReggioID sf-4 | Podcasts, Talks & Videoslatent.space/p/brex/James Reggio, chief technology officer, Brexself-described: Brex, a few seats of several tools chosen by employeesOrganization-widePublished Jan 17, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026CurrentListed, no finding position
I Stopped Using Cursor, Here's WhyID ir-27 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewssagebynature.substack.com/p/i-stopped-using-cursor-heres-whySage Choi, software engineerself-described: Sage Choi's Substack newsletterIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 9, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Cursor US$200 vs. Claude Max + Cursor: Usage Limits and Trade-offsID dc-37 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/cursor-200-vs-claude-max-cursor-usage-limits-and-trade-offs/148298emanuelgrammenos, Cursor user for two yearsself-described: Cursor community forum, two years of useIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 8, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
AI Native Dev: What AI Engineering Looks Like at Meta, Coinbase, ServiceTitan and ThoughtWorksID sf-1 | Podcasts, Talks & Videoswww.youtube.com/watch?v=OnM7sWLnAfwSepehr Khosravi, machine learning platform engineer, Coinbaseself-described: Coinbase, which tracks AI use per developerIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 6, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Cursor Pro: Auto Mode "Unlimited" usage no longer feels unlimitedID dc-36 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/cursor-pro-auto-mode-unlimited-usage-no-longer-feels-unlimited/148050mikail (ju5ti5e), Cursor Pro subscriberself-described: Cursor community forum, Pro planIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 5, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Vibe coding killed CursorID ir-26 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsischemist.com/writings/long-form/how-vibe-coding-killed-cursorAnton Morgunov, researcher and developerself-described: Own research code and personal appsIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 1, 2026Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Comment on: Graphite is joining CursorID dc-34 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46328929ziml77, Hacker News commenter, self-describedProfessional teamPublished Dec 19, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Graphite is joining CursorID dc-35 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=46329095santoriv, Hacker News commenterself-described: Large enterprise companyIndividual practitionerPublished Dec 19, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Cursor Is Brilliant, And Here's Why I Still Hate Using ItID ir-25 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsshanechang.com/p/cursor-windsurf-comparison-review/Shane Chang, full-stack engineer running an AI startupself-described: Own startup, type-strict Python codebaseIndividual practitionerPublished Dec 19, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
How We Use AI Coding AgentsID ld-06 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewswww.eventual.ai/blog/how-we-use-ai-coding-agentsYK Sugi, Eventual engineering teamEventual, maker of the Daft data engine; team split between Claude Code and CursorProfessional teamPublished Dec 15, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Running data-driven evaluations of AI engineering toolsID sx-19 | Podcasts, Talks & Videosgetdx.com/podcast/running-data-driven-evaluations-of-ai-engineering-tools/Laura Tacho, host of the Engineering Enablement podcast at DXDeveloper productivity research across DX customer companiesIndividual practitionerPublished Dec 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Current
Reply in: Stop Shipping Unstable BuildsID dc-33 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/stop-shipping-unstable-builds/143002/80Stergios (StergiosDikos), developer on a team that accesses Claude through AWS Bedrockself-described: Team using AWS Bedrock for Claude in CursorVery small teamPublished Dec 9, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Why I Switched from Cursor to Claude Code (And Cut My AI Costs by 10x)ID ir-24 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsnamiru.ai/blog/why-i-switched-from-cursor-to-claude-code-and-cut-my-ai-costs-by-10xPatrik Kelemen, founder of Namiru.aiself-described: Own product developmentIndividual practitionerPublished Dec 9, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Stop Shipping Unstable BuildsID dc-32 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/stop-shipping-unstable-builds/143002HungHo (user129), Cursor user since the 0.x versionsself-described: Daily use, including remote work over SSHIndividual practitionerPublished Nov 18, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Building AI-Powered Migration Tools: Compressing 4 Sprints Into 3 Days with Cursor, Windsurf, and ClaudeID sx-17 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.salesforce.com/building-ai-powered-migration-tools-compressing-4-sprints-into-3-days-with-cursor-windsurf-and-claude/Tripti Sheth, Senior Director of Software Engineering, Monitoring Cloud Notification Management, SalesforceMigration tooling for 1,200 alert notification policiesTechnical leadershipPublished Nov 17, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Cursor has literally changed my lifeID dc-31 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/cursor-has-literally-changed-my-life/142659Emi Buliga, solo startup developerself-described: Solo startup, about 30k lines of codeIndividual practitionerPublished Nov 14, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Is there better tool out there than cursor?ID dc-29 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/is-there-better-tool-out-there-than-cursor/142287Antti Kojo, Cursor userself-described: Software developmentIndividual practitionerPublished Nov 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Visual indication that you are using Max Mode, spent a ton of money without noticing in Max ModeID dc-30 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/visual-indication-that-you-are-using-max-mode-spent-a-ton-of-money-without-noticing-in-max-mode/142321Ignacio Ferreira, Cursor Ultra subscriberself-described: LinuxIndividual practitionerPublished Nov 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
How Cursor AI Slashed Dashboard Migration Time 75% Across 240 QueriesID ir-22 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.salesforce.com/how-cursor-ai-slashed-dashboard-migration-time-75-across-240-queries/Lakshmi Dontamsetti, Senior Manager of Software Engineering for Mobile Performance at Salesforceself-described: Salesforce Mobile Performance Engineering team, Splunk to Tableau migrationProfessional teamPublished Nov 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Reply in: 2.0, A step in the wrong directionID dc-28 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/2-0-a-step-in-the-wrong-direction/139648/55Adrian (QTom), developer whose company provides AI coding toolsself-described: Company that provided a Claude Max 20x planProfessional teamPublished Nov 2, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
2.0: A step in the wrong directionID dc-26 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/2-0-a-step-in-the-wrong-direction/139648John Collins, Cursor userself-described: Own projectsIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 30, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Composer: Building a fast frontier model with RLID dc-27 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45757434NitpickLawyer, Hacker News commenter, self-describedVery small teamPublished Oct 30, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
I made a dashboard to track actual costs after Sept 15 pricingID dc-25 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/i-made-a-dashboard-to-track-actual-costs-after-sept-15-pricing/138059hime, Cursor user and dashboard authorself-described: Cursor community forum, individual accountIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 19, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Why the push for Agentic when models can barely follow a single simple instruction?ID dc-24 | Developer Communitiesforum.cursor.com/t/why-the-push-for-agentic-when-models-can-barely-follow-a-single-simple-instruction/137154singularityskynet, Cursor userself-described: Go codebaseIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 13, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Two things LLM coding agents are still bad atID dc-23 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45528074bunderbunder, Hacker News commenterself-described: Team where management mandated CursorVery small teamPublished Oct 9, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
I played 1,000 hands of online poker and built a web app with Cursor AIID ir-21 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsblog.rchase.com/i-played-1-000-hands-of-online-poker-and-built-a-web-app-with-cursor-ai/Reilly Chase, independent builderself-described: Solo, Laravel side projectIndividual practitionerPublished Oct 8, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor 1.7ID dc-22 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=45440136saltyoldman, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company standardized on CursorProfessional teamPublished Oct 1, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
How AI Tools Cut Customer Escalation Time: From Days of Manual Work to MinutesID ld-08 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.salesforce.com/how-ai-tools-cut-customer-escalation-time-from-days-of-manual-work-to-minutes/Kristin Foss, VP of Software Engineering for Customer Centric Engineering at SalesforceSalesforce Customer Centric Engineering, 180 engineers handling customer escalationsTechnical leadershipPublished Sep 29, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
How tech companies measure the impact of AI on software developmentID sx-11 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsnewsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/how-tech-companies-measure-the-impact-of-aiSuhail Patel, leads the platform teams at Monzo Bankself-described: Regulated UK neobank, platform engineeringTechnical leadershipPublished Sep 16, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicableListed, no finding position
Building Sustainable Enterprise AI Adoption: Cultural Strategies That Achieved 95% Developer EngagementID ir-20 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.salesforce.com/building-sustainable-enterprise-ai-adoption-cultural-strategies-that-achieved-95-developer-engagement/Scott Yancey, EVP of Software Engineering at Salesforceself-described: Salesforce, teams working in the Core monolithTechnical leadershipPublished Sep 8, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Automatic pull request reviewing with Cursor's BugbotID ir-19 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsmadewithlove.com/blog/automatic-pull-request-reviewing-with-cursors-bugbot/Peter Eysermans, engineer at madewithloveself-described: Small engineering team at a software consultancyVery small teamPublished Sep 2, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
X post: "Continuing the journey of optimal LLM-assisted coding experience"ID sx-08 | Developer Communitiesx.com/karpathy/status/1959703967694545296Andrej Karpathy, AI researcher and former Director of AI at Teslaself-described: Own coding projectsIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 24, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Why I switched from Cursor to Claude CodeID ir-18 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewscraftbettersoftware.com/p/claude-code-ai-best-practicesDaniel Moka, software engineer and newsletter authorself-described: Their development teamVery small teamPublished Aug 23, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
How Cursor AI Cut Legacy Code Coverage Time by 85%ID sx-16 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.salesforce.com/how-cursor-ai-cut-legacy-code-coverage-time-by-85/Rachna Singh, Senior Director of Software Engineering, Einstein Activity Capture, SalesforceLegacy Java, Scala and Kotlin repositories under an 80% coverage mandateTechnical leadershipPublished Aug 18, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Testing AI coding agents (2025): Cursor vs. Claude, OpenAI, and GeminiID sx-03 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsrender.com/blog/ai-coding-agents-benchmarkMitch Alderson, software engineer writing on the Render blogself-described: Production codebases at Render and a client siteIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor CLIID dc-21 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44832883benbayard, Hacker News commenterself-described: Company using Cursor as its main tool for monthsProfessional teamPublished Aug 8, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
AgentFlayer: When a Jira Ticket Can Steal Your SecretsID sx-20 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewslabs.zenity.io/post/when-a-jira-ticket-can-steal-your-secretsMarina Simakov, Zenity LabsSecurity research on Cursor with the Jira MCP server in auto-run modeProfessional teamPublished Aug 1, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicableListed, no finding position
Unpacking METR's findings: Does AI slow developers down?ID tc-01 | Podcasts, Talks & Videosgetdx.com/podcast/metrs-ai-findings/Quentin Anthony, METR study participant working on GPT-NeoXself-described: Open source GPT-NeoX developmentIndividual practitionerPublished Aug 1, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicableListed, no finding position
How AI Test Automation Cut Developer Productivity Bottlenecks by 30% at ScaleID ld-04 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.salesforce.com/how-ai-test-automation-cut-developer-productivity-bottlenecks-by-30-at-scale/Manoj Vaitla, senior engineer at SalesforceSalesforce Platform Quality Engineering, triage for 6 million daily testsProfessional teamPublished Jul 30, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Measuring the Impact of Early-2025 AI on Experienced Open-Source Developer ProductivityID sx-02 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsarxiv.org/html/2507.09089v2METR, independent AI research nonprofitself-described: 16 experienced open-source developers on 246 real issues in their own repositoriesIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 25, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
My Participation in the METR AI Productivity StudyID ir-17 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsdomenic.me/metr-ai-productivity/Domenic Denicola, sole active maintainer of jsdomself-described: jsdom, an open source codebase of about 1 million lines, in a randomized studyIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 15, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
How I use Claude Code (+ my best tips)ID ld-07 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewswww.builder.io/blog/claude-codeSteve Sewell, co-founder and CEO of Builder.ioBuilder.io codebase, including an 18,000-line React componentTechnical leadershipPublished Jul 11, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Measuring the impact of AI on experienced open-source developer productivityID dc-19 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44523822paulmist, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 10, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Measuring the impact of AI on experienced open-source developer productivityID dc-20 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44526103cadamsdotcom, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 10, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Clarifying our pricingID dc-18 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44471260mellosouls, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jul 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Boosting Developer Productivity with AI: Faster Dashboards, Automated Testing, and 70% Less Setup TimeID ld-05 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.salesforce.com/boosting-developer-productivity-with-ai-faster-dashboards-automated-testing-and-70-less-setup-time/Geeta Shankar, performance engineer at SalesforceSalesforce Code Builder performance team, browser IDE load and regression testingProfessional teamPublished Jun 25, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
How Salesforce Engineering Operationalized AI Productivity at ScaleID ir-16 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsengineering.salesforce.com/how-salesforce-engineering-operationalized-ai-productivity-at-scale/Vivienne Wei, with Geeta Shankar and Shiva Nimmagadda, Salesforce Engineeringself-described: Salesforce Engineering, six engineering cloudsOrganization-widePublished Jun 23, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Why I stopped using cursorID ir-14 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsandresc.bearblog.dev/why-i-stopped-using-cursor/Andres Crucetta, software developerself-described: Work tickets and personal programmingIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 20, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Transcript: 'How Two Engineers Ship Like a Team of 15 With AI Agents'ID ld-09 | Podcasts, Talks & Videosevery.to/podcast/transcript-how-two-engineers-ship-like-a-team-of-15-with-ai-agentsKieran Klaassen, general manager of Cora at EveryTwo-engineer team building Cora, an AI email product at EveryTechnical leadershipPublished Jun 11, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor 1.0ID dc-11 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44188288ai_assisted_dev, Hacker News commenterself-described: Own services with paying customersIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
Comment on: Cursor 1.0ID dc-12 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44189666dkersten, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor 1.0ID dc-13 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44190779luckyandroid, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor 1.0ID dc-14 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44191211jjice, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor 1.0ID dc-15 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44192928adastra22, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor 1.0ID dc-16 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44193049jimrandomh, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor 1.0ID dc-17 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44195217cmrx64, Hacker News commenterself-described: Solo, Rust distributed-systems componentsIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 5, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor 1.0ID dc-10 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=44186246nsingh2, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished Jun 4, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
How Jit overcame developer resistance to shift to CursorID ld-01 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsleaddev.com/technical-direction/how-jit-overcame-developer-resistance-shift-cursorDaniel Koch, vice president of engineering at Jitself-described: Jit engineering team, moved from JetBrains IDEs to CursorTechnical leadershipPublished May 15, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
After months of coding with LLMs, I'm going back to using my brainID sx-06 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsalbertofortin.com/writing/coding-with-aiAlberto Fortin, software engineer of 15 years and SaaS founderself-described: Solo SaaS, rewrite from PHP and MySQL to Go and ClickHouseIndividual practitionerPublished May 15, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?ID dc-04 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43960136fastball, Hacker News commenterself-described: Engineer at Known, co-founder of SupernotesIndividual practitionerPublished May 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?ID dc-05 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43960966whywhywhywhy, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?ID dc-06 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43961436rco8786, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?ID dc-07 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43962846nlh, Hacker News commenterself-described: Self-taught developer and full-time rare coin dealerIndividual practitionerPublished May 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?ID dc-08 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43962969chironjit, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Ask HN: Cursor or Windsurf?ID dc-09 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43963964w4, Hacker News commenter, self-describedIndividual practitionerPublished May 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Notes on rolling out Cursor and Claude CodeID dc-03 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43930078hallh, Hacker News commenter, self-describedVery small teamPublished May 8, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Nobody Codes Here Anymore: Notes on rolling out Cursor and Claude CodeID ir-06 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsghiculescu.substack.com/p/nobody-codes-here-anymoreAlex Ghiculescu, co-founder of Tandaself-described: Tanda, mature Ruby on Rails SaaS codebase, about 40 developersTechnical leadershipPublished Apr 29, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Needs a recheck
X post: "One very surprising thing I'm noticing"ID sx-09 | Developer Communitiesx.com/GergelyOrosz/status/1914863335457034422Gergely Orosz, author of The Pragmatic Engineer, formerly at Uber and Skypeself-described: Own side projects and APIsIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 23, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: An update to our pricingID dc-02 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43758726tartieret, Hacker News commenterself-described: CTO at Panevo; company standardized on Windsurf, devs on WSLProfessional teamPublished Apr 22, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Comment on: Cursor IDE support hallucinates lockout policy, causes user cancellationsID dc-01 | Developer Communitiesnews.ycombinator.com/item?id=43701824eranation, Hacker News commenterself-described: Enterprise customer who moved their whole team to CursorVery small teamPublished Apr 16, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
People Who Hype Cursor Usually Lack Technical SkillsID ir-05 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewsen.smallyu.net/2025/04/12/People%20Who%20Hype%20Cursor%20Usually%20Lack%20Technical%20Skills/smallyu, Go developerself-described: Work codebase, Go and smart contractsIndividual practitionerPublished Apr 12, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
X post: "There's a new kind of coding I call vibe coding"ID sx-07 | Developer Communitiesx.com/karpathy/status/1886192184808149383Andrej Karpathy, AI researcher and former Director of AI at Teslaself-described: Throwaway weekend projectsIndividual practitionerPublished Feb 2, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Using LLMs and Cursor to become a finisherID ir-01 | Engineering Blogs & Reviewszohaib.me/using-llms-and-cursor-for-finishing-projects-productivity/Zohaib Rauf, engineering manager writing about their side projectsself-described: Solo, greenfield side projectsIndividual practitionerPublished Jan 2, 2025Assessment reviewed Nov 1, 2026Still applicable
Models & PricingID pd-01 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/models-and-pricingCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 28, 2026CurrentVerification only
Team PricingID pd-02 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/account/teams/pricingCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 28, 2026CurrentVerification only
Team DashboardID pd-15 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/account/teams/dashboardCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 28, 2026CurrentVerification only
Cursor RouterID pd-03 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/cursor-routerCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
AgentID pd-04 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/agent/overviewCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Plan ModeID pd-05 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/agent/plan-modeCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Agent SecurityID pd-06 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/agent/securityCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
RulesID pd-07 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/rulesCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
HooksID pd-08 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/hooksCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Cloud AgentsID pd-09 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/cloud-agentCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Cloud Agents security overviewID pd-10 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/cloud-agent/securityCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
BugbotID pd-11 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/bugbotCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Agent ReviewID pd-12 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/agent/agent-reviewCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Cursor CLIID pd-13 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/cli/overviewCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Privacy and Data GovernanceID pd-14 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/enterprise/privacy-and-data-governanceCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
Usage AnalyticsID pd-16 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/account/teams/analyticsCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
SSOID pd-17 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/account/teams/ssoCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
VS Code MigrationID pd-18 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/configuration/migrations/vscodeCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
JetBrainsID pd-19 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/integrations/jetbrainsCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
OriginID pd-20 | Product Documentationcursor.com/docs/originCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only
SecurityID pd-21 | Product Documentationcursor.com/securityCursorOfficialNot counted (documentation)No date statedDocumentation checked Oct 12, 2026CurrentVerification only