[miroljub]

> Cursor Composer 1 was Qwen and this is Kimi. IDE is based on VSCode. The entire company is build on packaging open source and reselling it.

The question is, where's the outrage? Why are there no headlines "USA steals Chinese tech?" "All USA can do is make a cheap copy of Chinese SOTA models".

> So funny to see Twitter go wild saying "a 50 person team just beat Anthropic" blah blah.

Well, if it's an American company, then it's a noble underdog story. When Chinese do it, they are thieves leeching on the US tech investment.

It's all so predictable, even the comments here.

[hakunin]

Do you think Chinese LLMs acquired training data legitimately? I think the whole situation is a bit funny, but I don't think the US "started it" to be fair.

[geocar]

> Do you think Chinese LLMs acquired training data legitimately?

I think they probably acquire it in accordance with Chinese law.

> but I don't think the US "started it" to be fair.

Who are you quoting with those marks? Started what? To be fair to whom?

[hakunin]

> I think they probably acquire it in accordance with Chinese law.

You can easily look up[1] how China struggles with effective enforcement of IP laws.

And specifically for LLMs, Anthropic recently claimed that Chinese models trained on it without permission.[2]

> Who are you quoting with those marks?

Double quote marks have other uses besides direct quotes, such as signaling unusual usage.[3] In this case, talking about countries like they're squabbling kids.

> Started what?

Fishy use of others' IP, packaging others' work without attribution.

> To be fair to whom?

To US companies using Chinese LLMs without attribution.

---

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_intellectual_pr...

[2]: https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinese-companies-used-c...

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_marks_in_English#Sig...

[satvikpendem]

They said Chinese law, which is not the same as American law, and presumably using IP the way they have is legal there, if indeed they actually did, as allegations of IP theft are just that, allegations, and even if they weren't, all nations in the history of mankind have been "stealing" "intellectual property" since forever, including the US from Britain, literally with the good graces of the fledgling US government [0].

As to what Anthropic said, it's quite specious as this analysis shows [1], ie the amount of "exchanges" is only tantamount to a single day or two of promoting, not nearly enough to actually get good RL training data from. Regardless, it's not as if other American LLM companies obtained training data legitimately, whatever that means in today's world.

[0] https://theworld.org/stories/2014/02/18/us-complains-other-n...

[1] https://youtu.be/_k22WAEAfpE

[hakunin]

The linked wikipedia article specifically talks about China struggling to enforce Chinese law. Here's a quote:

> Despite making efforts in intellectual property protection in China, a major obstacle in prosecution is corruption in courts; local protectionism and political influence prohibits effective enforcement of intellectual property laws. To help overcome local corruption, China established specialized IP courts and sharply increased financial penalties.

> all nations in the history of mankind have been "stealing" "intellectual property" since forever

You can't use 100-400 years ago as the counterexample to what happens today. It's like justifying Russian invasion of Ukraine with colonists invading Native American territories. We're in a different world order, things that were normalized that far back shouldn't be normalized today.

[geocar]

> The linked wikipedia article specifically talks about China struggling to enforce Chinese law. Here's a quote: > > Despite making efforts in intellectual property protection in China, a major obstacle in prosecution is corruption in courts; local protectionism and political influence prohibits effective enforcement of intellectual property laws. To help overcome local corruption, China established specialized IP courts and sharply increased financial penalties.

That doesn't sound like struggling to me.

https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/201...

Compare with the growth in cases in the US:

https://www.uscourts.gov/data-news/judiciary-news/2020/02/13...

Why is it China increasing cases is evidence of struggling to you? Do you think the US is also struggling? What exactly are you talking about?

> You can't use 100-400 years ago as the counterexample to what happens today.

The US joined the Berne convention in 1988. I do not think we are talking about 400 years ago, but we're talking about the majority of the US history, having law that it was okay to ignore copyrights of the rest of the world.

> It's like justifying Russian invasion of Ukraine with colonists invading Native American territories

I don't agree: One can also mean that there is no justification for the invasion of the Ukraine just like there was no justification for invading American territories.

[satvikpendem]

They are struggling to enforce domestic IP law because it directly affects their own businesses, they don't care about international IP law.

Human nature is the same in any time period, there is no "normalization" at all, it's just how humans have always and will always continue to act, even today, with the world order currently breaking down.

[ywvcbk]

> You can't use 100-400 years ago as the counterexample

Or just a year or two ago?

> https://www.npr.org/2025/09/05/nx-s1-5529404/anthropic-settl...

[geocar]

> You can easily look up[1] how China struggles with effective enforcement of IP laws.

I didn't see anything in there about Chinese companies violating Chinese law.

Can you so easily look up how American companies struggle with effective enforcement of Chinese IP laws? I think it should be pretty easy to see how American companies struggle with effective enforcement of European IP laws, and I can tell you it is similar.

From here, it is not so clear that the US can even enforce its own laws at the moment.

> signaling unusual usage

Thank you!

> In this case, talking about countries like they're squabbling kids.

> > Started what?

> Fishy use of others' IP, packaging others' work without attribution.

I see. I guess if China is 3000 years old then maybe obviously, because the US is such a young country by comparison.

So you think it is "fair"[1] to violate Chinese Law because there were people in China who violated US law first?

If so, I think that is pretty childish.

[1]: I am trying it out!

[hakunin]

> So you think it is "fair" […]

Maybe fair in a tit-for-tat sort of way, but not okay. That's why I called the whole situation funny. The rest of your post is answered in the sibling comment.

[ywvcbk]

> claimed that Chinese models trained on it without permission

That's extremely rich coming from Anthropic, though? Well they would know all about it of course...

[hakunin]

> That's extremely rich coming from Anthropic

And funny.

[fooster]

I mean as if anthropic and openai did.

[muzani]

If American policies stay this way, we'll see "Made in USA. Designed in Beijing."

[Tostino]

I mean, I (and a ton of others) were pretty outspoken about ollama being a pack of grifters. The thing they are good at is marketing though, so it drowns out other projects in the area.

[MangoCoffee]

yup. fully agree. American cry and bitch about Chinese copy and steal their tech then an American company (Cursor) use/steal open source tech from China and everyone is silence.

[chzblck]

because its open source.

[miroljub]

A license doesn't matter if the perpetrator doesn't comply with it.

[elashri]

Open source licence requires attribution which obviously it is not done in this case.

[iknowstuff]

No it doesn’t? Depends on the license

[elashri]

I doubt that there is any open source license that don't require attribution but we are talking about a specific case and the license require it [1]

[1] https://huggingface.co/moonshotai/Kimi-K2.5/blob/main/LICENS...

[thefounder]

Like licenses are worth anything in the AI world…