Happy to answer any questions about Origin or source control in general!
Are there any fundamental differences, ie ways of working that solve the worktrees problem?
We wanted to release a beta so people could start experimenting with our scalability and extensibility themselves. Over the next few weeks, you can expect a handful of features starting to change source control to better understand and work with agents.
While the real solution is to actually self-host as I said before [0], it is worth testing to see how much can GitHub's users tolerate the endless outages and unreliability and where they go next.
We'll see if they want Cursor Origin or the declining GitHub.
I don't want either tbh. There's plenty of open source alternatives. If there's anyone I trust less than Microsoft, it's Elon Musk.
There are many people who will not touch this and look down upon those that do. Ethics and morals still seem to have some weight
> "hey can you push to origin main?"
now has two separate meanings.
A LLM may inadvertently push your code to a new provider without you knowing. It's walking a thin line between genius-growth-move and domain typosquatting.
I wonder if they were waiting for a major githut incident :D
But the website uses 100% CPU. And this is a beta for paid plans, not a GitHub alternative.
* That is, if a lab like Deepseek doesn't release a "good enough" model for the cost of electricity + a thin margin. Then all AI company lose and all consumers win.
Right now there are many providers providing different tradeoffs, for different usages.
Would "winning" mean releasing an all-purpose better model that will outperform every other companies for all kind of tasks ? Something like AGI but cost effective ?
Or is it winning the consumer-side AI race ? Like making a kind of "super personal AI assistant" the likes you would see in movies and TVs ?
I'm not arguing, I am just struggling to understand what it usually means when somebody says that, it's not like competitors will go bankrupt the second OpenAI/Anthropic/Whatever does something specific.
There's a lot of space to innovate around collaboration and version control in the age of agentic workflows.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/08/15/woman-a...
https://katv.com/news/local/prominent-arkansas-photographer-...
The main limitation right now is that to share the code with anyone outside your Cursor organization, you need to sync it with GitHub.
xAI was caught uploading any repo their coding agent touched to their storage only last month. This isn’t about Musk’s ideology: it’s about his trustworthiness. He sincerely believes he’s the only person who can save the world and that allows him to justify an awful lot of moral lapses.
Over the next few weeks you can expect a lot more from us on integrations with agents, understanding agent-written code (without having to read through all of the code), and automatically getting your PRs to a mergable state. Stay tuned :)
croes•5h ago
Then again, what did I expect from a company named cursor.
maherbeg•4h ago
Cursor was also a great name given that it evolved into an advanced AI assisted auto complete. I think their team does a solid job with naming.
croes•4h ago
Without additional search terms you get the wrong results.
A word that is already used in computer is a bad name.
And with AI it won’t get better. Ambiguity is a source of confusion and mistakes.
By your logic pull/push/main are also great names.
One main purpose of a name is distinguishability.
treexs•3h ago
Surely they have a chance of doing it again with Origin