Cursor's Ryo Lu on Designing Living Tools, the Future of Coding , & Creating Soulful Things with AI

In my career as a professional product designer, the thing I hate the most is like like people want the design to be final. Uh where's the final version of

final. Uh where's the final version of this mock? If you don't have it, I won't

this mock? If you don't have it, I won't start building it. Like that doesn't make sense [laughter] cuz the first mock is never right.

>> Yeah, >> because AI is really good at composing parts. I'm actually thinking we need to

parts. I'm actually thinking we need to like build bricks. Really good bricks.

Put your soul in it. You need to care about every detail. You you need to not accept whatever purple gradient the AI gave you as the end.

>> Like that is just the beginning.

>> Ah yes.

>> You always start with [ __ ] You always start with slob with AI and then you refine it. You make

refine it. You make >> the beginning not the end.

>> Yeah. You you just poke at it with little prompts and then it'll get better. Before we get into the episode,

better. Before we get into the episode, I have an announcement. In case you missed it, I'm going fulltime on Dialectic thanks to the support of my new presenting partner, Notion. I

[snorts] guess first and foremost, I'm just excited and grateful. I'm about a year into this. I crossed my year anniversary of starting at the end of November. Um, and it feels fitting to be

November. Um, and it feels fitting to be able to fully lean in and consolidate and focus on something that has just felt like being in my lane. Um, getting

to amplify people I'm excited about. And

I've been reflecting on this and I think this ties to notion, too. Like I've been reflecting like what is what is the show? What makes it good? What am I

show? What makes it good? What am I trying to do here? And there's been a handful of patterns that have become more obvious over time, things that have become more legible. I think it's definitely a show about ideas,

particularly I think I love to talk to people who make stuff about the ideas and philosophies that underpin them. But

I was also reflecting on like what what are the patterns that stand out most and I think they tie into why notion is such an ideal partner for me. The first is I think it's a show about where ideas meet

action. I love introspection and

action. I love introspection and reflection and thoughtfulness and philosophy. But I think I also love

philosophy. But I think I also love people who are able to take those things and use it to make contact with reality.

This combination of introspection and agency and action. Ideas are powerful, but we got to put them to work. The

second pattern is craft. Craft is

aspirational. Craft is when we deploy our taste. Craft is a human touch. craft

our taste. Craft is a human touch. craft

is saying, "I'm just going to push things a little bit more to make them a little bit better." And whether my guests are people who design things or

write or invest or whatever else they might create, I think there is a deep amount of craft inside of how they approach what they make and inside the things that they make. And the third

pattern is soul or soulfulness.

This word is obviously a little bit hard to pin down and you might instead say authenticity or originality or even aliveness.

But soul is about when somebody line is lined up I think like in who they are with the way they're showing up in the world and maybe even more than that a willingness to reach deep. And so I think when I think about what I'm drawn

to and all of the people I admire and certainly the people I talk to for this show, it is soul at its core. One of the things I'm most proud of for this show is the audience. It feels like it's my

kind of people. Some of my guests are listeners. Some of the people I've met

listeners. Some of the people I've met through the show have been incredible.

And Aka Kthari, co-founder of Notion, is a listener. And so, we've gotten to know

a listener. And so, we've gotten to know each other the last few months. And when

I started to think about what it would look like to go full-time on Dialectic and bring on a partner, it was ultimately a pretty easy choice. I think

it was clear to me that he really got the maybe even intangible elements that made the show special to me and to the people who were listening. But also I think those those patterns I mentioned earlier um really do embody notion too

and that's why it made it such a right fit. Notion makes beautiful tools for

fit. Notion makes beautiful tools for your life's work. I think I'm someone who's certainly interested in tools.

I've talked to a bunch of tool makers on this show including Notion's own Jeffrey Lit. He wasn't at Notion when we spoke

Lit. He wasn't at Notion when we spoke and he is now. But also on those themes from earlier I mean Notion is a tool for taking your ideas and turning them into

action. Whether that be tinkering with

action. Whether that be tinkering with them or expanding them or sharing them, it starts with ideas. With notion, it's a brand and a tool that despite a long road and tremendous scale and a great

deal of complexity has embodied craft, I think, at every step of the way, both as a brand and as a product. And then

finally, soul. Again, soul might be in the eye of the beholder, but I think notion is a tool that cares deeply about letting its users pour themselves into the product they use. And I think

Notion's community and templates and remixing and creative expression are all evidence of just that, a product that is full of aliveness. So it ultimately wasn't a very hard decision to partner

with Ocean and I feel so grateful to them for helping me embark on this journey. As for what's to come, I mean I

journey. As for what's to come, I mean I I think a lot more of the same.

Hopefully people who are inspiring to you, people you're really excited about and people who surprise you. I I would like to keep you guessing. I think too, a lot more video for those of you who are listening um or haven't tried. Video

is coming. And more than anything, I I hope to amplify people who can or have the ability to shine. Last but not least, while I'm so grateful to Notion, I'm even more grateful to those of you

who have listened, watched, read, whatever, found a way to support me. I

feel so lucky. I hope I am doing you a service when you spend your time here listening to these conversations. I hope

you go take your ideas and turn them into things. I hope you do it with

into things. I hope you do it with craft. I hope you do it with soul. With

craft. I hope you do it with soul. With

that, I will I will turn it over to the episode, but thank you so much and and I'm so excited to continue to share dialectic with you. Welcome to Dialectic with Rio Lou. Rio is the head of design

at Cursor. Prior he was a designer at

at Cursor. Prior he was a designer at Notion working across so many different projects and features including notion AI for about 5 years and he was a designer at Stripe and Auna. He grew up

between China and Montreal and now lives in San Francisco where he's focused on building cursor and helping anyone create software. We talked extensively

create software. We talked extensively about his design philosophy and how he is constantly moving between simplicity and complexity, bare material and

abstraction and why in his words so many of these ideas and these patterns are all the same thing. We also talk about how design is changing where in the past

using tools like Figma it felt more like painting or drawing, now much of Rio's design feels more like sculpting clay or finding David in the marble. um so much

of his philosophy is about getting closer to the material and in the case of digital things of software that is working with code and that's why I think why he's so excited about cursor

the line between vibe coding and real engineering is also I think everyone's feeling that it's flattening and there's no better example of that than Rio's personal project Rio OS which you can find on his website which is essentially

a nearly a full-on operating system of apps and games and simulations you can talk to Rio's agent you and I've watched him literally make games and new apps

for real OS in real OS and in some sense it's entirely vibecoded. Um he's built it using cursor. Uh and what's I think so outstanding about it is that it's

quite literally the opposite of AI slop.

It is so deeply personalized. It has so much soul. It feels so much like Rio. So

much soul. It feels so much like Rio. So

we talk about how he is iteratively designing both his personal projects as well as all of the design decisions he's making at Cursor and helping more and more people across the team work with

him in a range of different ways. This

is definitely a philosophical discussion. Much of it is about

discussion. Much of it is about designing things that feel true or even inevitable. Um but in many ways I think

inevitable. Um but in many ways I think Rio is also an amazing example of somebody who is doing a lot more doing than thinking. And so I think that

than thinking. And so I think that marriage together u makes him so effective and I hope and I think we we really dove into that today.

One of my favorite things Rio wrote is an essay on how to make great things and we talk extensively about what goes into that breath versus depth. Uh iteration,

prioritizing doing and learning over thinking, balancing quality and speed and more. If you already make things,

and more. If you already make things, especially software, I hope you are inspired to be all the more uh willing to try things to be more flexible, be mind be more dynamic and expand the

boundaries of what you can personally do. And if you feel like you could be

do. And if you feel like you could be making more things, I hope you are inspired not only to try tools like cursor and make software, but to apply some of this philosophy to making any

range of things. Um, I just so love the way Rio thinks about um getting up close with material and how learning with material, getting feedback from it

is how we design anything. Um, it's

addictive. It pulls us in. And in the limit, uh, we end up making things that other people get to enjoy. I hope you enjoy the conversation as much as I did.

With that, here's Rio Lou.

>> Rio Lou.

>> Okay, let's go.

>> We're here. Thank you for being here.

This I'm really excited about this.

>> Yes.

>> Um we're going to start with a I guess what you could call a catchphrase of yours, which is >> you love to say it's all the same thing.

>> Yes.

>> What does that mean and what does it tell us about design? H

it's like when you look at all the apps you use or even like everything around you if even looking at ourselves as like

humans as like life forms we are always built. It's almost like with the same

built. It's almost like with the same parts that are really simple, >> but when you merge them or combine them, recombine them,

they give a rise to complexity.

Um, like the most fundamental elements are the same.

Like a lot of the concepts that we use, you know, regardless if you call it like, uh, this is a task management thing or like a document thing, they're

all just like information organized in databases. [snorts] Yeah. So there's not

databases. [snorts] Yeah. So there's not that much difference.

And then there's always like something at the core that is like the the simplest form of the thing itself.

And it's most likely things that you've seen before or there's like analoges in nature or like patterns.

When you talk about those simple things, are they abstract things?

>> Mhm. Like are they as you say are they patterns or like metaphors or sort of like ideas or are they can they be also like very concrete?

>> Oh yeah I think they can be very concrete and it's like the same thing manifested at different levels >> different levels of abstraction.

>> Okay. So you can think of maybe like ah these are my core ideas but then how do I say visually represent it in like this constrained 2D space which is like a screen.

>> Yeah.

>> Like a phone or like you stretch it to like a window then you have more space.

Then what are the things that should be shown like what are the relationships between them? Um what are the more

between them? Um what are the more important bits that you want people to get in? Like it's almost like

get in? Like it's almost like it's like a multifloor apartment.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

>> And then you you want people to ah go to the lobby on the top floor with the best view. They can kind of see everything.

view. They can kind of see everything.

Ah this is cool. Now let me go to the place I want. Um that's more like for the users. But the same thing applies to

the users. But the same thing applies to say like you're designing UI, you're designing some flows, you're designing how the data model works, you're like conceptualizing how do I, you know, make

this into like a big scalable distributed distributed system. And when

you're operating on all these layers, they're still like like just manifestations of those core concepts or ideas.

>> Then you keep everything together and they feel cohesive.

when like a lot of people maybe they think of these things as separate things and then they treat them as like ah I need to do this box first and then do that box first and then each

people doing the boxes don't talk to each other then they build something that's kind of it's like it wiggles >> you know [snorts]

yeah it doesn't have the connectedness you have you have a you have an essay little essay you wrote >> about complexity coming before simplicity Uh one one part you say it's like a swan serene on the surface but

paddling like hell beneath.

>> Yes.

>> Which is an amazing metaphor. Why does

complexity actually have to come before simplicity?

>> I do think say conceptually it is possible to say uh these are the core building blocks of my world and that's it. Let's just go.

>> Yeah. Um

but like it needs to survive in the real world that we live in.

>> Like there's people who like they don't come here to look at your essay or look at your academic idea of like [clears throat] ah these are the ways we need to like connect these computer ideas.

>> Yes.

>> They're here to do something.

>> Yes.

>> So they come here >> they should ideally you know do the thing they want to do first without thinking without >> without thinking too much.

without thinking too much. They can do it. They can actually like, you know,

it. They can actually like, you know, slowly master it, configure the thing, customize it.

>> Then they kind of know what what is in there.

>> You can do it from both ends and they kind of are it's like two sides of the same coin almost.

>> But a lot of people they only see one side. say like we do a lot of like user

side. say like we do a lot of like user centered design or like you know let's start with a user problem and then

decompose it or like do some research look at some numbers uh figure out if solution A B for this problem one which one is the best ah a is the best oh

let's just do a and then you keep doing this a a a b a b and then now you have a platter of like random choices and then they don't connect and then

they're all like discrete buttons on your on your UI.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

>> And that's kind of crazy >> when fundamentally maybe all these ideas are the same ideas or maybe they they are like better versions of your original ideas >> like a remix version of that or like a

reconfigurations of the thing.

>> Yeah. You're sort of seeing both the swan both aspects of the swan at the same time. you're seeing the elegance in

same time. you're seeing the elegance in the kind of >> it's like you need to test your model with real world examples and people >> and then [clears throat] as you do that you figure out

this part of the system is a little weak I need to make it better.

>> Yeah.

>> We're like ah we maybe we really need we really need to add this new thing >> then we should probably do it cuz a lot of people need it.

>> Yeah. But but if you if you're just conceptualizing yourself and you're kind of in your own world thinking and you're just like ideiating, then you're not really doing anything

like you're not helping anyone. You're

just you're untethered.

>> Yeah. You're just like I don't know having fun yourself, I guess.

>> Another line from you. You say the universe is fundamentally modular.

Simple rules endlessly recombining creating emergent complexity. Design is

the human practice of participating in that process consciously. We look at the world, identify the patterns, extract the rules, and use them to build new realities. Obviously, much of the sort

realities. Obviously, much of the sort of it's all the same thing inside of that. Uh I'm curious maybe at the most

that. Uh I'm curious maybe at the most zoomed out level like what what initially drew you to what you describe as design there and what kind of keeps you coming back? like what is it about

this um almost like philosophical approach to the world that's so compelling to you?

>> I did not come here like you know when I started I did not know the difference between even like engineering or design

or product or anything.

I just saw these things that were made by people.

Like I I started playing with like software when I was a kid. I would get these like pirated CDs. Um and then they all they're almost like software

subscription packs monthly. Like they

get >> you you just load them on your PC and then you play with all the all the new apps. And then I started playing with

apps. And then I started playing with like all the office tools like all the fonts Excel PowerPoint

Photoshop, um video editing things, 3D making things, um programming tools, um starting making websites and stuff. And

as you do these things, as you make things, you start realize like the end output of what we do is just code,

but there's like a lot of different depth in all the layers.

Um, and if you're curious enough, you can go to every layer really deeply. Um

but the more you do these things like uh make more websites for different kinds of people or make different apps for

things um you realize like a lot of it is just the same ideas and then you also can trace it back to history

like when you look at people when they started this or when they were just again like ideiating they were things were not real because things weren't ready.

>> M >> um but the ideas were there and all you're doing is like remixing the idea, repackaging it a little bit and then you

want to find out what is the core essence things that you know you cannot remove that will always be there.

>> Yeah.

>> And then you keep making those better.

>> You use the phrase things weren't ready.

>> Yes. Obviously

technology um design applies across disciplines. Technology is an area where

disciplines. Technology is an area where design you actually are dealing with that sort of the the rate of progress.

I'm curious especially maybe now since what you have this great great uh future site you made for cursor where you're listing the kind of arc the lineage of computing. We're in the middle of um an

computing. We're in the middle of um an immense amount of readiness, you could say, but I'm curious what your relationship has been like to things being ready or maybe not ready even

let's say >> the last two years with AI models and cursor.

>> Yeah.

Yeah. There's like the technological level of whether it's ready, >> right?

>> But there's also the conceptual level of whether it's ready. It's like

for example notion even though technologically as like everything is kind of fully ready like notion itself is almost like just

databases in the cloud and then you can do live editing with people. you're just

manipulating like blogs and databases like that the ideas have existed for a long time >> right >> but then people have not caught up or people are not familiar with these ideas

>> then it's like still like kind of foreign to people >> and then boom AI happened then it's almost like using this new primitive new technology we can actually like help

people understand better or like make translations of ideas >> yeah it's bridging the conceptual gap Right. Right. Right. Like you can use

Right. Right. Right. Like you can use that to like bridge the gap and basically instead of people making databases manually or like they have to

learn about you know coding is like there's so many layers and then so many dependencies in order for you to do like a running program. You need to know so

many things.

um you can actually reduce that to like nothing but then it's like people can just start from the other end they get some output

they play they they tweak and as they do that they learn instead of like >> backing into it >> right instead of doing it in the reverse >> um it's like

I believe in it's like we are fundamentally the limiting factor like as humans >> like our brains can't process too much

information. We can't hold too many

information. We can't hold too many concepts in our heads.

>> Yeah.

>> Um then like which what we're doing is you're like simplifying the amount of information or ideas that you're giving

to people. It used to be like designers

to people. It used to be like designers have to do it, the thinkers have to do it, the inventors have to do it. They're

thinking about what is the simplest configuration of the thing, what are the parts, but now it's almost like a lot of

it can be handled by the AI then you can reach to like lower level primitives or even connect more things >> then >> you can pull in more complexity

>> cuz this but then the the presentation layer can still be simple and the simplicity can be more subjective. It is

not designed by the designer. It is

actually like to you the person using the thing or you're doing this thing the ideal configuration for that thing. I AI

can kind of >> do the translation.

>> Yeah. There's we're talking about simplicity. There's another comment you

simplicity. There's another comment you made that um is very similar to something you wrote about making things true.

>> Mhm.

>> Um and I think truth and simplicity next to each other seem interesting. You say

>> design is the practice of seeing through the surface of things to understand their underlying structure and then rearranging those elements into new forms that didn't exist. Design is

philosophy because it forces you to ask what is this thing really? What are its central properties? You talked about

central properties? You talked about that. What can I remove before it stops

that. What can I remove before it stops being itself? And once I understand that

being itself? And once I understand that what new things can I build this is the work not making things pretty, making things true.

>> Mhm.

I I think I have a sense and the listener probably does too, but what is maybe not what is the difference between truth and simplicity, but what is it maybe even what does it feel like when

you're designing and you're you're approaching tress >> or truth?

>> Oh, yeah.

Yeah. It's like you Yeah. The thing is I think

Yeah. The thing is I think I believe there is actually like a ultimate solution >> given say the amount of this space and

the constraints and the things you know.

>> Yeah.

>> But the problem is you never know everything. [laughter]

everything. [laughter] Um and the things always change. So it's

like maybe it is the ultimate solution for this point in time for this condition but then maybe tomorrow it's not true anymore. M

>> but I think you know there are always like say when you're doing a product or making software like a set of things that don't really change

and it is so important to like figure out what those things are. um those are almost like your fundamental building

blocks or ideas of the the software the it's like I see like software as it's just like a tree of concepts and you package it up give it a name

>> and then give it a UI put it out >> are those concepts changing a lot or they changing very little >> like most likely they don't change >> okay

>> where it is really hard to change them especially the ones that are core to the thing. Um, for example, I worked at a

thing. Um, for example, I worked at a sauna. A sauna is basically projects and

sauna. A sauna is basically projects and tasks and everything revolves around it.

Every data model is like kind of locked in there. And then for example, it will

in there. And then for example, it will be hard for Asana to expand into like whatever. But then it is easy for notion

whatever. But then it is easy for notion to do that because notion's building blocks on the in the underlaying like abstractions are more flexible.

>> Yeah. And then they actually don't change that much. All you're doing is like you're fixing some problems with how they connect to each other or h now there's like a different kind of data

that we can present better. What are the better views for that? How do people like you know combine these things so that they can >> do a lot more crazy things? Um how do we

help people like instead of them building this thing maybe the AI agent does this thing. Um and say for cursor is like that common layer is even lower

which is code >> and it's so generic.

>> Yeah.

>> It means you can actually do anything >> is truth universality is it the same thing >> kind of or like it's like given this constraint

what is that ultimate answer or what is that simplest configuration of your system that does everything?

>> Yeah. the most beautiful state. [snorts]

state. [snorts] >> You have another idea about inevitability. Uh you say the best

inevitability. Uh you say the best future solutions seem almost retroactively inevitable. The

retroactively inevitable. The philosopher who said that the truth is what never had to be said. Yeah. Might

as well have been talking about a product so perfectly aligned with its context that no competitor can have propose a simpler alternative.

>> Is that I mean it obviously connects to the truth and the universality. Um

maybe it maybe maybe really what you're pointing to there is what you said earlier which is that there there actually is some objective final at least final for right now form.

>> Mhm.

>> How do you design? How do you design towards inevitability?

>> Yeah. You kind of project. It's like you always design say there's a set of fundamentals that don't change and then there's like a ideal future

that you want to go to. Mhm.

>> Then [clears throat] you figure out h what are the deltas between that >> is that f that future. Sorry to

interrupt you. Um

>> you you could certainly think take notion example. Um we are going to take

notion example. Um we are going to take a really really simple set of very flexible building blocks.

>> Some of that you when you were working on it 5 years ago or Ivan when he was working on it 10 years ago may have had some sort of future conception. I've

seen some of the early decks Ivan had like he >> there's crazy stuff in it.

>> It's amazing. But on some level, of course, he didn't fully know.

>> And so I'm curious how like how important it is for the specificity of that inevitable future outcome, >> right? It's more like

>> right? It's more like >> it looks retroactively inevitable, but when you get there, it's very ambiguous. Like you actually don't

very ambiguous. Like you actually don't know.

>> Like you start with you actually don't know. And then you're you're looking at

know. And then you're you're looking at what do I have? [clears throat]

>> What do I want to do? or like you know my future state my ideal you can just imagine like don't limit yourself

>> and then you start thinking h maybe there are these kind of big changes I need to do these are the little steps that I need to take the closer you are

to the present the clearer the the step is the further out the muddier it is but then the only way you can start doing or

start going towards it as you do things.

You build you know steps or I kind of like say like prototypes or like pieces of it and then as they

get built, get used, get feedback, you kind of clarify the thing and you move forward.

Obviously a lot of this is philosophical. Um, someone might listen

philosophical. Um, someone might listen to this and this this combination of complexity and simplicity, it's really appealing. Most designers, most people

appealing. Most designers, most people making things along a long road, um, >> are forced to compromise somewhere along the line. And so it almost feels like

the line. And so it almost feels like maybe one of the things getting in the way of getting to truness or inevitability is practical compromise.

>> You're also very practical. You're

you're sort of just pulling this thread in many ways. Like how do you >> how do you sort of fend? I'm sure there are a million compromises notion could have made along the way. I'm sure there will be many compromises cursor is faced with.

>> Yes.

>> How do you relate to that?

>> Yeah. It's like

I don't want every single thing to be perfect or like there are certain things that are like say they're actually okay to be a little

divergent or like you you kind of let let it go a little bit, let it roam a little bit [clears throat] >> and then see what people feel. see see

how the thing, you know, does.

And then you're like on this constant loop of like re-examining what you have in your system,

all the things you add, see how they're perceived, and then you're trying to maybe now we need to like unify these things together. Maybe

now we need to like clean this this part up.

>> Yeah. Yeah. And then once you do that, then you maybe open up boom, this amount of like people can use it now or you make this part of the

experience better. Um,

experience better. Um, and it could like it's not like a feature level thing anymore. It's more like all these things

anymore. It's more like all these things together because they make a better system because the system is more flexible or extensible

and you also like increase its capabilities then it can do a lot more for a lot more people. Um,

and it's not just about like, uh, let's make this feature A and then see how it does and then run some numbers on the, I don't know, like

adoption retention whatever.

>> It's it's I it really kind of feels like it goes back to the swan. It's like um or or maybe use another metaphor. It's

like >> you seem to be constantly taking stock of both like what is this pixel and also what is the what is the picture of the >> you need to like go

around these layers of abstraction.

Yeah. If you

>> really want to make something truly simple, >> it's like a lot of people also think uh simplicity is about like removing things or let's just get rid of all the I don't

know any any feature that gets used less than 5% by of users and then you're like removing something that maybe the 0.1%

power user really loves and depends on.

Maybe the better way is to just like you just like marie condo it like you just clean it up a little bit or reorganizes that so that like most

people get the like the most easy path but there's still like little pathways for others.

Um you don't have to take things away.

You just tuck tuck them away maybe or like you build like elevators.

What do you say to It's funny you bring up Mie Condo. I think like for many people that's very aspirational. For

other people they're like how unrealistic. Like she doesn't live in

unrealistic. Like she doesn't live in the real world. She spends all her day cleaning. Like

cleaning. Like >> you've you've written and talked about minimalism which maybe is a little bit I think minimalism maybe >> people take it too far. Gets a bad rap.

>> Yeah.

>> How do you relate? Like you it it doesn't seem you you you present you're very refined. you you you um you clearly

very refined. you you you um you clearly care about aesthetics and yet Rio like it has like a little lived in like a livedin messiness almost.

>> Uhhuh.

>> Is that I don't know what my question is there but like do you how do you how do you have that sort of tidy thoughtful careful and also like aliveeness

in a system designing it?

I think it's like a lot of people think these attributes is like you have to have this or this when you can actually have both.

>> So like should it be simple or should it be complex?

Should it be flexible, should it be rigid?

Um to me it's almost like because software is it's like it's almost like a life form. It's like a

run. It can mutate. It changes itself.

run. It can mutate. It changes itself.

>> You don't have to be like so opinionated.

Like your opinion is actually taking the stance of I don't have too much opinion, but you always make things start really simple.

Um, and then you let people play with it. You let people discover what they

it. You let people discover what they want or the the the way to to do things.

what is you know their way to do things it is not my way like I don't want to force my like my way of

thinking or ah this is how you do it one two three onto you I just kind of give you like pathways and elevators

>> and the tools to do the thing you want >> yeah you have a line somewhere you say no point solutions always spectrums which I think captures that Yeah. Yeah.

It's like like fundamentally all these tools are the same things.

So like if you're okay with that then you don't have to really pick like ah do I

want to do this like cursor for um salespeople or cursor for coding. It

might be the same thing. M I want to talk about that kind of process of making and you you started to get out a little bit. You have this metaphor of of

little bit. You have this metaphor of of sort of like sculpting or finding what's in the stone that I think is really powerful that's not totally intuitive for how people think about >> creating. Um you say there's there's a

>> creating. Um you say there's there's a quiet almost mystical art to starting with something so unrefined that you're unsure if it's mud or marble and patiently revealing its shape until

others recognize its beauty. In the end, they'll say, "Of course, it's so obvious."

obvious." >> Yes.

>> Why? Why can't greatness be why must it be emergent?

>> Because you haven't seen enough. You

haven't tried enough. You think ah this first idea I have is perfect.

and you throw it out there and you realize maybe only I think like that or maybe people people like it but they

don't really understand the words or the nuance in there >> then you need to like keep tweaking and keep getting input. It's like

you never start with something that's like the the ultimate answer. You always

start with [ __ ] >> and then you make it better and better.

>> Is that the case for every medium?

>> I think so.

>> Like um >> like even when you're painting.

>> Yeah.

>> You start with like the pencil sketches and then you layer on top like the paint >> or like you're sculpting, you start with

just like a blob of clay and you're like making the highle like shapes good enough and then I start like working on

the details. It's the same thing like

the details. It's the same thing like you never you never get the first shot right. Even more true with like AI.

right. Even more true with like AI.

>> Yeah. Um, but with AI is like or like say with curs composer one because it's so fast. It's like

so fast. It's like it's a different way to do things now like you you're building as you're seeing things as you're thinking, >> right?

>> And as you're designing and it's all together.

>> Yeah. I wonder like you you referred to software earlier as almost like an organism. Um,

organism. Um, >> and maybe that's something that's true about software inherently, but it feels especially true with AI now.

>> Um, >> and you, one of the things you said to me when we met, you you talked about sort of how you used to work being much more like painting or drawing and now it feeling much more sculpting or finding something into a stone.

>> Yeah.

>> I don't know that that way of thinking is intuitive to people.

>> Um, even people who make software. And

so maybe one question I'd have would be like, have you started to think about it in a fundamentally different way with AI or is this actually just a continuation?

>> I think it's almost like going backwards.

It's like I started building things myself and designing everything.

A lot of times I did not use like pixel tools. I just coded it. And then

tools. I just coded it. And then

um I became like a professional product designer.

>> Yeah. Capital D designer.

>> Yeah. Yeah. And then Oh, interesting.

Now I just make mocks and fancy animated prototypes and then I'll drop that mock into my P PM's PRD >> and I'll wait for things to happen and

things don't happen. [laughter]

Um, and then now it's like going backwards, meaning like I have an idea.

I'll just prototype it out.

>> Yeah. Like a kid or like a kid with a piece of glass.

>> Oh, yeah. Or, oh, there's a bug. Okay,

I'll just like make a screenshot and then circle the thing. Ah, add cursor fix this and it'll

thing. Ah, add cursor fix this and it'll get fixed. It's like instead of waiting,

get fixed. It's like instead of waiting, instead of getting stuck in pictures or words, you actually make the thing

where you use software or use code as a tool to communicate your ideas better.

And because we're software makers, the best tool is code.

There's a I interviewed early on I interviewed a couple of designers like industrial designers, physical designers um Seway and Taylor and one of the things that they feel really strongly about is like they hate renders.

>> It's like make make the prototype.

>> Oh yeah.

>> And I almost feel like this is the digital version of that is like get it down in the metal code.

>> Exactly. You you have to play with the material.

>> Like our material as software makers is never the pixels. It is the code itself that renders the pixels.

Yeah.

>> Yeah. You have a line I love. You say,

uh, "But it existed and because it existed, it could be improved."

>> Mhm.

>> Which so captures the like power of working with actual material.

>> Mhm.

>> Uh, it I I do wonder like you you we we were when we first talking, you said um I use Figma when I want to go into my my old way of thinking. Yeah.

thinking. Yeah.

>> Which obviously relates to what you just said.

I'm curious today like and maybe part of it is that you're designing cursor which is especially uh conducive to it's it's less about the pixels already.

>> Mhm.

>> But when do you find yourself sort of like tempted towards the old way of thinking and like is it a yo-yo? Is it a like will you be using Figma at all in a year?

>> Oh yeah.

It's like there are just tools and like sometimes we think in words, sometimes we think in pictures.

>> On podcast we definitely think words.

>> Yeah. Or like I don't know making videos too. Some people do that.

too. Some people do that.

>> Yeah.

>> Um or like slides or whatever.

Like those are just you know different artifacts or like forms to help us think. And I I think

like I don't want to take them away like different people have their preform preferred form to think. [clears throat]

>> Maybe some people are more like linear.

They just write text.

>> Yeah.

>> Um I like bullets. I I think I got the disease from notion. It's like like all I do now is like I go go out and then I

walk. I have ideas. I'll open a notion

walk. I have ideas. I'll open a notion dock and I put in a list and then once I'm done with my walk,

I'll go go back. Huh. Maybe now draw some pictures and maybe I'll do Figma cuz it's so like cuz I've been doing this for so long. is

like water to me.

>> Like I don't I don't think Yeah. when I

make more artboards or when I do the Figma like shortcuts. So when they change shortcuts or like they move around my things, I get mad. [laughter]

>> They keep doing >> I saw you you were really mad that they had changed the check box.

>> Oh to box. Yeah. Made the quarters.

>> That's for another thing. That's okay.

That's more for like it's like I feel like like every piece of software is almost like a person.

>> It has [clears throat] a style.

>> It has like a history. It has some character >> essence.

>> Like you don't want to lose that.

>> Yeah.

>> You don't want to order water everything down to like a border radius for pixels.

[laughter] >> Um like sometimes it's good to keep that.

>> Yeah. M

>> keep a lineage and keep a thing that's maybe a little weird >> but is so like characteristic.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah.

>> On the on the note of sort of your thinking time and you talked about thinking and >> using different tools you're thinking using Figma.

>> Um you you've you've talked about your walking and like the the value of the sort of like idle time, the space between >> um >> thinking time isn't wasted time.

Are you and and maybe this is running against what you just said about it feeling like water, but are are those like different modes like when you >> watching you use cursor at least on your phone when we were hanging out?

>> It didn't seem like you were doing very much thinking. You were just like you

much thinking. You were just like you were just throwing like paint at the canvas, >> right?

>> Um and then when you write about your walks or like that that feels like a very structured is that maybe a template for how >> that's more for the longer term things.

Ah, >> yeah. We're like vague ideas, ambiguous,

>> yeah. We're like vague ideas, ambiguous, >> dreaming.

>> We're like, huh, maybe we should do this. I'm not sure.

this. I'm not sure.

>> Maybe we should do it this way. What are

the like the components in there? How do

I like break it down? Um, what are the things people care about?

>> Whereas when you're using Figma, you're using cursor. or

using cursor. or >> those are more for maybe like Figma it's like there's still some say like difficulty

where it is just like it just takes more time to say build a really crazy prototype in like code >> ah >> so if you want just communicate ideas in 2D

space really quickly draw some pictures that's fine and then when the thing gets to the state where I think I know what it this

um I want to figure out how they fit together, how they work together, what are the you know, especially with like building AI stuff,

there's like so many like both like procedural and like non-deterministic things that you need to think about. It is really like really

hard to simulate in Figma or like in static pictures.

>> Yeah. And you're not with the material.

you're not up close to the material >> like you actually need to glue it up and then see how they fit together. See how

the states transition? Uh if I get this like error, what happens? Or uh if the the the return gets too long, what happens? D like you never get that in

happens? D like you never get that in Figma.

>> I want to talk a little bit about Rio OS. Mhm.

OS. Mhm.

>> Um, both because I know you're you're very obsessed with it and it it does feel like the perfect embodiment of this sort of working with clay.

>> Um, and I I think it's I would strongly encourage people listening or watching to go to poke around with it. Um, as I understand it, Rio started as a

soundboard app you made for your friends when you were leaving Notion. And it

sort of feels like it's this just infinite thread you keep pulling or this piece of clay you just kind of keep turning over in your hand.

>> Yeah.

>> Um >> for people's contact I we we when we first met you had your phone out and you were like we were just ch talking and you were literally making apps as we sat

there and talked.

>> What have you learned about making things and maybe even about yourself from this crazy project?

>> Uhhuh.

I learned that, oh [ __ ] I can do all of this.

I think that's the biggest thing. And

it's like it's all like little ideas piling up on each other.

Um, you start with like something simple, small.

Um, and you just keep building and building and building and building and see it see it grow and then when it grows to like a size where it's like

you know there's some constraints. I

actually started the thing in Vzero not cursor >> like the soundboard thing.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

>> Um like I ran into some like errors that I'm like I need to do it in cursor.

>> [snorts] >> And you use cursor routes prior to that?

>> Not really. I tried three times. I

turned three times.

>> Oh, interesting. Why?

>> Yeah. It's like the first time I was like, "Oh, cool. New new code editor.

Let me try it out."

>> Ah, I typed some lines, it completes like five lines of code instead of one line of code versus like GitHub Copilot.

>> Then I tried >> because you felt like it was trying to do too much.

>> No, it's like it's just completing code.

Oh, >> with more lines. Yeah. And then second time it was the chat.

>> Yeah.

>> Um it's like chat GPT next to your code.

>> Yeah.

>> And it can read the code. It can answer some questions but it can't do much. So

I turned and the third time it was like discovering the agent.

>> This is post using VZ or pre >> after. Okay. It's like

>> after. Okay. It's like

I needed some tool that can let me do anything.

Then I found cursor and I'm like hooked. Yeah. And you you start from like simple things and then

you just ask some maybe a little crazier idea and then you see it getting built.

And see now with plan mode you actually see how the models think and you can change you can be part of every you know step

but it's still your clay but it's like the model now handles all the parts that I don't really care about.

I actually studied like computer science. Okay.

science. Okay.

>> Because I love computers and software, but I hated writing code or >> like all the algorithms and stuff we

learned is like kind of useless. And

>> what I care more about is like >> like what are the ideas?

>> How do people, you know, feel um >> how quickly can I make this thing? I

thought of >> Mhm. Exactly. It's like the thing, the

>> Mhm. Exactly. It's like the thing, the idea, the concepts. I want to play with the concepts.

>> You mentioned it like real OS.

It doesn't really seem like something like that could be should be able to be built by just throwing more paint at the canvas. Like it feels like the type of

canvas. Like it feels like the type of thing that should have needed to be more plants.

>> There's a lot of things that say like it's not just throwing.

>> Okay. So it's almost like it's a constant throwing things and cleaning up [ __ ] >> Okay, same more.

>> It also happens there in Rio.

>> What is the cleaning up? That's that's

what we're not seeing, I think.

>> Yeah, you don't see that, but you can see in my commit logs, >> the maintenance.

>> Yeah, it's like >> the more things you add, the more things you realize. H it's the same same thing

you realize. H it's the same same thing that I just talked like earlier. is like

[snorts] ha these all these apps need say some AI endpoint and some O and like they need to store their states

>> uh they they need to write or read into the file system D like maybe I started you know doing the file

system part from the text edit app but then now I want you know all the other ones that that can use the same ideas

um to use the thing then I need to re kind of abstract the system like put that

part out or unify some you know state management things. Um,

management things. Um, and then you need to kind of refactor your original things. Even though maybe to the user it looks exactly the same.

>> Um, >> that part of it though I think is where like for lack of more precise language people get stuck.

>> Yeah.

>> It's like again I I watched you use cursor. It's like you're literally it's

cursor. It's like you're literally it's like you're just nudging the model and and your prompts are not Yeah. It's that

it's that demeanor um for for the listeners. You're just poking at it.

listeners. You're just poking at it.

Yeah, >> it's not these long specs. I'm watching

you just be like, can you come up with an app idea?

>> Like your language is really casual and so I think to the average person using Vzero >> um uh or the person who tries cursor and turnurning, I think we'll talk about it

later. You're very clearly focused with

later. You're very clearly focused with cursor on building for the hardcore user. Mhm.

user. Mhm.

>> But for someone who has somewhat of a computer science background, hadn't written a lot of code, it maybe what I wonder about is like in the poking process, you're getting more invested that you care enough to do the hard

maintenance part.

>> Oh yeah. I learned a lot by building real like before even like since I became a professional

product designer, I would [snorts] have little projects I do Yeah. on the side like the first few years I kept doing those >> and then I got busier or something and

then I stopped >> and then every time I tried to go back oh [ __ ] I need to learn like React 18 when tell CSS whatever all of this like

new things and then it takes a long time I have to read all the docs I need to understand how people do things now um but it's

Now with the agent, you don't have to do that, but you're still doing that. It's

like the agent maybe helps you do the research. It comes up with some, huh,

research. It comes up with some, huh, here are how people do it now. And then

maybe gives you some alternative options. Maybe you know certain things,

options. Maybe you know certain things, you also don't know certain things. Um

but the agent can kind of help you find your way and then you can say ah now just do this. It will write the code.

You can look at the code still you can learn from its output how things work. Um

>> yeah you're getting deeper into the complexity.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Like

>> by it's what intentionally or otherwise.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Like it's almost like just by reading like a lot of users say this too. It's

like they love reading how the models think.

They actually want to expand everything and then they want to look at look at all the output >> because it helps them understand what the model is doing, gain trust from

it and learn, you know, especially when they're starting to code.

>> Yeah. It's a it's it's might be a strange comparison, but uh somebody I interviewed, he was talking about reading with his like seven or eight-year-old daughter >> Mhm.

>> and how reading with her this these these books that were actually far beyond her sort of ability level >> it pulled her in and it and now she's reading whatever I don't know if she's reading an but like she's reading well

beyond her level and there is something about sort of like >> being exposed to someone else's thinking.

>> Yeah.

>> Even if it's GBT5 codeex or composer or whatever.

>> Yeah. It's like

most of the as you said it's like most of the prompts that I did in real is like just really short simple things.

>> Yeah.

this it's like theoretically we are ready like you can actually build a lot of things and you just vibe but there is like you know I'm

a little cheating too cuz I know things before >> right >> so I know like when when the AI gets stuck how to like get get it unstuck or like

um as I play more like my full-time job is to play with all these models and use cursor.

So I kind of develop like some intuition on how these say different models behave as I make it. Yeah. Or like what are

their limits? Maybe this one's faster,

their limits? Maybe this one's faster, this one's slower, this one's smarter at certain things. um that a lot of people

certain things. um that a lot of people like they don't know they don't really know

what to do yet.

So that helps me like put this back to the to the tool. On that last note, um, >> when is it your job as the design or

maybe a better way of asking, when is it cursor's job to try to solve those things versus the models improvements job to solve those things?

>> I think it's both.

>> Okay.

>> Um, the models can kind of raise in capabilities or like say now the models are getting better at say using terminal commands,

uh, clicking around in a browser, stuff like that. Like as they get better,

like that. Like as they get better, like you still need a way to kind of unlock those capabilities.

So you need to fit them back to the tool itself, package them up. Um make make them just really obvious. Um so people can

just play with them.

um they don't have to think too much like how do I I don't know trigger it or get it out or use this crazy like script or MCP thing to do something.

>> Yeah.

>> Um like you start simplifying making things that are possible more obvious.

>> Yeah. For more people.

>> Ah [sighs] that's an interesting way of thinking about it. Yeah. Making things

more obvious. making the next step more obvious.

>> Yeah. It's like you're constantly simplifying unifying figuring out like, uh, now that we I have this and this and this, now how do

I like clean it up even better? It it

feels like it relates a little bit to the like readiness thing we talked about talked about earlier which is like >> it feels like maybe the model's job is the technical readiness and your job at

cursor is the cognitive readiness.

>> Yes.

Like again humans are kind of we're like kind of singlethreaded. You

know we've been trying a lot with like multi- aent or like parallelization of like agents.

>> Yeah.

And like nobody has really solved it yet because most people are still thinking about no like let's just give you 15 agents. Here you go. 15 agents are like

agents. Here you go. 15 agents are like have done all these changes like 2,000 lines of changes.

>> Here you go.

>> It's like all horsepower, no steering wheel.

>> Yeah. Yeah. So, we need to like figure out, you know, these like I'm not even sure if there will be new

patterns, but it's like better framings or packaging or interfaces

for people to just get out get utility out of these things. um

without breaking their minds or like changing too much or feeling overwhelmed.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah. You um you've obviously worked on a lot of different types of systems. Um and you're sort of drawn to almost like this container >> type tool or product or something. Um,

and certainly at least with cursor and notion, you have you have a line where you say systems thinking is essential because the only path to building products that scale not just technically but cognitively along the lines of what we were just saying.

>> Yeah.

>> Um, what are the is the goal when you're designing a tool like that um to allow

the user to stay as singlethreaded as possible and like like is that essentially what you're designing for?

>> No.

>> No. Well, it's like it's up to you.

>> Ah, >> um it's like you need to design the zero state, the one state and the end state.

>> Ah, [clears throat] >> for everything and then see how they melt together.

>> This is the simplicity complexity.

>> Yeah. Yeah.

>> Like when you have n * n * n, it will be kind of crazy.

>> But if you really want to be there, so be it.

>> Yeah. You you should meet the user where they're at.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Like if you are actually like someone I don't know you you have ADHD or something like you want like eight different windows all like running so be it.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah. Like

>> the average person probably wants, >> right?

>> Maybe average people just want one main thread and then >> it's like how we're thinking right now is like >> instead of having you like you need to review changes from these 15 different

agents, maybe we help you like kind of cluster them a little bit, organize them semantically. Maybe you instead of

semantically. Maybe you instead of talking to each of them separately, you just talk to one person or like one agent and then it's almost like your PM or like your assistant and then it's

going to figure out ah these these guys are blocked. Do you want to like approve

are blocked. Do you want to like approve the terminal command? Uh these changes I think they're pretty good. This is bad.

You should look at it.

>> There's a very small subset of users want Starcraft and most people want Candy Crush or whatever.

>> Right. It's actually like I'm fine with both. Yeah,

both. Yeah, >> we can actually do like both like a I don't know a Tik Tok and a Starcraft >> because of AI.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah. Um there's an idea that I think is really interesting that I think is connected here which is >> about slack >> in systems. You say the best systems have slack in them. Redundancy isn't

always waste. It's optionality. Multiple

paths mean you can explore without breaking everything. The core remains

breaking everything. The core remains simple >> uh while layering itself into more complex permutations. Controlled chaos

complex permutations. Controlled chaos means you're able you're stable enough to not collapse but loose enough to to evolve.

>> Mhm.

>> I think that's such a powerful metaphor.

Um and maybe slack is that like willingness to go as complex as I want to. Yeah.

to. Yeah.

>> Um, >> but yeah, I wonder about like you somewhere else you talk about that sort of chaos and order together.

>> It's like you you let diversions happen >> and you let things evolve. It's like

evolution.

>> Yeah.

>> It's like the na like nature is constantly like making more, you know, permutations of the same thing a little different.

see which one works better.

>> How do you give a tool more slack?

>> It's what does it >> mean to add slack to cursor, >> right? It's like

>> right? It's like >> it's a little complicated, but also it's like sometimes you just kind of, you know, all designers or people we're like kind

of perfectionists.

uh we want like things to be exactly what we wanted, but sometimes you just allow this ugly thing

to pop up or this random button someone else added and then I kind of keep a blind eye on it. [laughter]

Um and you let it simmer a little bit. You

let people play with it more like our internal group of people. Um, and then as you do that or like maybe people, you

know, threw the first bucket of paint and then now that it's there, you can see it, you can play with it, you can think about it

more, understand it better then >> versus sort of roping off the the canvas.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Then it's like ah now I know how this thing fits with the other things or like ah this thing is actually like a start of something much bigger.

Mhm.

>> Um then it's almost like this constant, you know, chaos convergence

thing and it gets into like a equilibrium and then you want that thing to be like almost at the edge of like the maximum

chaos you can allow >> for the thing. Your [clears throat] job as a designer is almost >> like you're trying to help people like uh here is the line don't cross it.

>> Yeah.

>> And then you're also helping people like bring this like >> just like reducing like entropy >> like just just >> tame it a little bit back. Um we're like

ah these you you should talk together and then make this thing actually the same thing.

>> Uh or like ah you're making a new thing.

Cool. think about these four things that we have.

>> Yeah.

>> And that's it. I'll just let them think about how does this new thing relates to the four things and then >> ideally they come back with a good answer.

>> You're almost like um you're [clears throat] like the game maker or you're like you're the agent of evolution that sort of like setting the rules of a little bit of what is tolerated, but critically you're not

snuffing things out too early.

>> Yeah. And it's like you're you're mostly like an observer >> or like I'm not dictating how things should happen.

I just tell you like uh given all the things I know, here's probably how we do it.

And this is also maybe why it seems like you're very attuned to not just the different ideas for cursor inside of the company but >> all over like all over Twitter different stakeholders, >> students, whatever.

>> Yeah.

>> Cuz you're almost trying to like broaden the aperture of what is allowed in, >> right? Cuz fundamentally it is the same

>> right? Cuz fundamentally it is the same thing. All the vibe coding tools,

thing. All the vibe coding tools, cursor, all the CLI agents, it's all the same thing. But only like

cursor kind of tries to bridge all of them.

>> And like I try to give people like their ideal form.

And I think like one big like a big reason cursor got popular is because it looks exactly like VS Code at least before.

Um but as we kind of noticed like people changed their patterns of usage, people kind of moved from like manual coding at like reviewing every line to do more agents.

>> Yeah, you have to move with them.

>> Then we just flip, >> right?

>> Like our defaults change as the world moves and as the product evolves, but fundamentally it's still the same thing.

>> What is cursor? H

>> obviously cursor is a plugin or a skin of VS Code on some like not just that >> of course of course not just that and it's changing every day like um

>> again at least when we spoke first like you talked about cursor like it like at least the way you seem to relate to cursor is almost like it's your little butler that just does things for you.

It's your hand. Um, and we talked about code being the universal language. Like

in many ways it almost feels like cursor is just this medium to work with code with computer, >> right?

>> And so >> I'm kind of asking about what cursor will be when I ask what cursor is, but like do you have a conceptual do you have a metaphor? You like it is a tool but it's sort of this is it just the

agent.

I see it as as like we we started from like one slice of like making software which is you're just actively coding when you're sitting on the computer.

>> Yeah.

>> We put an AI next to it so that I can help you write the code.

And now it's like like I want cursor to be it's like one place where you can do everything about making software and

that is not just writing code and it's not just the developers there's like the PMs thinking about what

to do how to measure things aggregate all the data synthesize it figure out like what are the problems to fix. Um,

breaking it down into tasks. There is

the designer.

Maybe they're trying to kind of, you know, explore in in 2D space higher level abstractions.

There's the engineers writing the code, but also they need to like review. They need to test whether it worked.

um once you put it out, you need to like gather feedback and input from the market and people using it.

Like all of this is making software uh especially in like a team or like a company.

Um and now people's people's workflows and tools and the metaphors they use the artifacts are all scattered and disjoint.

>> Yes.

Whereas I think cursor can actually help everyone put everything together again and then using the agent it's the same

agent to help you translate between so your form of thinking your preferred artifact into the code itself.

Um then it's almost like anyone who wants to build software or any team they can just be closer together.

>> Yeah.

>> And then the agent kind of helps them.

It's like solving a lot of the issues that we have today that were kind of created by all the tools that that we've made in the last >> Yeah. We just need one more tool.

>> Yeah. We just need one more tool.

You need you need a thing that kind of melts them fully.

>> What about cursor shape though?

>> Yeah.

>> Every people have been trying to build the final tool forever, >> right?

>> What about cursor shape, >> right? [clears throat]

>> right? [clears throat] >> Makes it what you're describing theoretically possible acknowledging still currently serving mainly deps.

>> Yeah. I think it's like like people joke about like cursor is like a fork of VS Code and it's just code editor. But if

you look at VS Code like deeply, there is actually like really good low-level primitives.

For example, like in VS Code, there's a concept of editors like you can open different files in different kinds of editors.

Some of them might be looking like, you know, the code editor. Maybe there's

like a diff viewer. Maybe there's like a markdown preview. Maybe there's a

markdown preview. Maybe there's a browser. D.

browser. D.

Like just having this allows me to just present different things to people differently even though you know underneath it's still the same code.

>> Is that because it works with files or >> Yeah. Yeah.

>> Yeah. Yeah.

>> Yeah. So that's another thing is like in VS Code there's a concept of workspace which is just like folders and files.

Maybe they're tied to a repo. It's like

a lot of these low-level ideas again it's like they don't have to change and I don't intend to change them though like I don't know if we will ever

detach from VS Code at some points maybe once we kind of you know go fully agent >> um >> or at least a lot of the people using >> code exactly right

>> but I think it's still like like the challenge for me is to come up with a way to so you're tying all of these different

workflows and people's preferences together into one thing and you're trying to come up with like different reconfigurations of that thing.

>> Yeah.

>> How they transition between these states um for these different people? What do

they each see by default?

>> How do they like customize it? How do

they actually talk together? That's a

really complex problem.

>> How do we move from like cursor from like a single player thing to like a multiplayer thing?

>> Not sure.

>> You got your work cut out for you.

>> Yeah.

>> Um on the on the note of like literally using cursor, we talked about the way you kind of poke it at least when you're using Rios.

>> Yeah.

>> Um you had given me like your advice was like treat it as someone who's like a little dumb.

>> Yeah. [clears throat]

>> Composing things it's seen before.

>> Yeah.

>> Don't expect to come up with full components. you shared a list of 12

components. you shared a list of 12 rules or tips for using cursor back in April.

>> Yeah.

>> Um so those are almost like two slice timestamps of of advice around cursor like >> uh one of those I think that stood out to me is if the code is wrong just write it yourself. Cursor learns faster when

it yourself. Cursor learns faster when from edits than explanations. Obviously

that's >> that works for someone with a coding ability not without a coding ability.

>> Um >> how often is advice like this changing?

>> Oh yeah it changed a lot.

>> Okay.

>> I would say a lot of the things I said in April don't apply. Okay.

>> For example, like the agents now are so good at finding stuff that you don't have to say like at the exact file anymore.

>> Back then it was like if you don't include the right context, the agent will just come up with something random or it will make some mistake. What is

the what is the is there anything that stands out as long as you've been working on cursor that has been um true consistently or even like the

type of person who consistently remains good at like what is staying the same I guess is what I'm asking >> not much >> not much you got to be surfing the new wave every >> yeah things are constantly changing

>> even the things that appear the same might be replaced under the hood >> that's both exciting but also back to the you were talking about you u I don't know it was notion or something else like some you you have a tool you're

used to and they change a little Jeffrey Lit has this metaphorical they change your chef knives >> that's hard to >> yeah I guess there are things that don't change say

the agent it used to be like you know before I joined cursor there were like five things like there

was command K tab chat composer composer agent.

Uh the first thing I did was to merge the agent. So chat composer composer

the agent. So chat composer composer agent became agent with like you know more specific modes if you want you know more specific behaviors.

>> And then the agent the idea is they're all the same. They're just like apply configurations on top of the agent.

Maybe for this agent it has some custom prompts. It has a specific model set to

prompts. It has a specific model set to it. Maybe it has like some tools that I

it. Maybe it has like some tools that I can use or cannot.

That's it. And you give it a name.

Um, and then these agents all, you know, operate on different models. Those don't

change. They need context that don't change. And then you need to show

change. And then you need to show something with the editors that don't change.

>> Yeah. But all those things are changing.

>> But all of these things are changing.

Yeah. It's like all the things inside are changing. I guess your bet is that

are changing. I guess your bet is that somebody >> know the art changing, >> right? So if your bet too is that if

>> right? So if your bet too is that if somebody's playing with the clay, they're okay with change because they are living with the material in a way that >> you have to or like

>> I think like in my career as a professional product designer, the thing I hate the most is like h like people want the

design to be final.

Uh where's the final version of this mock? If you don't have it, I won't

mock? If you don't have it, I won't start building it.

Like that doesn't make sense [laughter] >> cuz the first mock is never right.

>> Yeah.

>> Like you have to keep building it.

>> Yeah.

>> Like now it's almost like the reverse happens at cursor which is kind of chaotic but I'm actually okay with it.

It's like our engineers or like some of our like enterprise PMs, they start like vibe coding and then some weird patterns emerge or

>> you need to clean it up again.

>> You need to like wrangle it back. And

then now it's like because AI is really good at composing parts.

I'm actually thinking we need to like build bricks. Really good bricks. It's

build bricks. Really good bricks. It's

like from all the things that we have as like kind of suck all the patterns the the core bricks.

>> This is something that seems like you guys did a really good job in notion which is that you're like pretty principled about what the bricks were going to be.

>> Yeah. Notion does it more like on the conceptual level.

>> Oh, you mean like tangible feature bricks almost?

>> More like I don't know. It's like

low-level components up to like patterns that people can just reuse.

>> Yeah.

>> That are not just you know every dialogue is different or list view is different.

>> [snorts] >> you you um >> like you start helping people create these patterns that just work and just fit

together that both humans and agents can, you know, >> Yeah.

>> make things a little better by not reinventing the wheels every time cuz the agents when they're like lacking guidance, they have a tendency to do

that.

We talked a bit about like I think you're clearly designing for hardcore users. Um even if people are vibe coding

users. Um even if people are vibe coding with cursor like maybe the lines are thinning.

>> There was I think a line from you somewhere that I found where you >> or maybe I made this up but >> um I think you talked about like designing for power like to give the user power.

>> What does that look like maybe in the context of cursor or more broadly?

>> Yeah, I think a lot of people So, I don't see your users as like they're dumb. They're not. They can

they're dumb. They're not. They can

figure things out. They don't have to be like babysitted. They can

like babysitted. They can It's like I want to make things the simplest that

you can when you start, but as you go, you get all the, you know, depth that

you want. Um, like as a beginner, you

you want. Um, like as a beginner, you get the same tools as what the pros use, just maybe packed a little differently.

>> Yeah.

>> Um, >> yeah. You don't have 18.

>> yeah. You don't have 18.

>> You don't see everything yet, but maybe this this thing that you get can do like 80 90% of what you wanted. Maybe

on the other side like currently there's I think most people's my my intuition would be that most engineers relationship is like there's five coding and then there's real engineering obviously that's >> that's the same

>> challenged yeah >> what is how what does it look like to design for power and for serious hardcore users on the like vibe coding dimension >> and part of that is conceptual right

because it's like they have to be willing to say I'm going to I'm going to give up the wheel >> or not the wheel Maybe, but I'm going to let the engine be.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

We do like little nudges and we change our defaults sometimes. And I think those are probably the most powerful tools that you can do as a as a product or like a piece of software.

>> Yeah.

>> And then you want to introduce them in a way that like people can still get out of it if they want, but you want to show them that, huh, now here's the new

world. Here's how you do it. Um, if you

world. Here's how you do it. Um, if you don't want it, you can get out, but it's almost like again

the same thing but reconfigured or like slightly more optimized for the new way of doing things.

>> There's a little trust there too, right?

Like it's like actually if you if you trust us for a minute, let us show you how much the agent can do.

>> Yeah.

Yeah. people like a lot of people haven't felt it yet or maybe they've tried it before but it didn't work and then they kind of lost their trust >> right >> and then they never

>> they can turn three times like you >> yeah and it's like so it's I would say for now you can probably do something pretty

impressive even on the first shot but even say like for for a month ago it's not the So maybe the first time you tried cursor

it didn't work or it got blocked or it did something stupid and now you're like I don't want it. Um

it's like we need to figure out how to like get the new people in um without too much thinking and setup.

They can do stuff.

get the existing users, you know, onto like better ways to do things that are more like up to date >> without feeling like they're behind.

>> It's like you want to kind of carry them over instead of like teleporting them to the new world and then they're like, "Ah, what the [ __ ] is [laughter] this?"

>> Yeah. And then there's like getting the people who maybe tried cursive before that thought it was not good to come back cuz it's good now.

Um yeah, there's like work for us to do there.

>> Solvable problems. >> Yeah, >> many many problems to solve. Uh some

questions about kind of process and >> some some other stuff that relate you have this amazing essay about about creating something great. Um so a few things in this >> broader vein.

>> First, like I guess we kind of talked about this and maybe this is silly, but is design kind of just writing now? Like

it seems like most of the design you're doing >> Mhm.

>> you have your walks you go on and then you go to cursor and you write.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

>> Maybe you write a longer spec sheet >> as cursor improves.

>> Yeah, I do write docs and stuff.

I think it is just about like communicating your idea and all the details that you can think of in a way digestible for your peers >> and the agent

>> and the agent critically.

>> Yeah. Um

so depending on like who I work with even I will change the way I make these things.

>> So like I work with an engineer his name is Ian. He loves mocks. He loves

is Ian. He loves mocks. He loves

pictures. Like when I do like live code prototypes, he doesn't like it. He just

want Figma mocks with all the like every detail in one picture.

>> Yeah.

>> So I just do that with him. Uh or if I, you know, talk about something more vague, people have like also vague ideas, then I keep it more like maybe

they're just bullets, maybe they're like simple writing. And then maybe when we

simple writing. And then maybe when we want to do something like it's going to be like a multi-month stage thing that's a little bigger.

>> Yeah.

>> Then I'll write a big RFC.

>> Yeah. It's all like kind of inherited from the way we do it at notion the writing part. M [clears throat] >> but with cursor it's like now there's

like also you just kind of ah I have this idea I'll add it to my prototype and then ho ho look at this

should we do it yeah let's do it >> I suspect those two modes together are quite powerful >> like you get from like the most high level like ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab ab abstract level to the most

detail >> writing when when you say the abstract level you in long writing >> or like even just high level bullets or what are the ideas and the constraint

>> are are is a is a really detailed spec doc and a actual prototype two forms of like two almost different trees of detail.

>> It's like the same thing but >> visualized differently at different levels.

>> Totally.

>> Yeah.

>> What is on that note maybe like what does a week what does your time look like over I think cursor has like one meeting a week.

>> Mhm. You're going on walks and thinking you're proddding rios whatever uh you're >> in Figma sometimes like what is that like pie chart of time >> that's kind of random

>> every week's different >> yeah very different >> yeah we also like jam with people at the office people are always like there

um not much meetings um >> but a lot of talking Sounds like not scheduled meetings, but a lot of

>> Yeah. chatting and talking and jamming

>> Yeah. chatting and talking and jamming and um yeah, drawing pictures, finding

people to help join us. Yeah. And

join us. Yeah. And

>> podcasting sometimes.

>> Oh, yeah.

Getting designers to to turn into coders.

>> You're a big ring leader for that.

>> Yeah. I want to make it happen. What do

you say to the average designer currently who's feeling stressed out?

>> You're ready.

>> You're ready.

>> Yeah. Like it's it's time. Just start

building.

>> Just start pulling the thread. Get it

get in there with the clay >> and then send me all the feedback and if you don't like what you're seeing, we'll fix it. Maybe on that note, although

fix it. Maybe on that note, although this could apply to engineers or any maker too, um I think one intuition people have around AI, maybe the average creative or artist, nontechnical person especially,

>> is that vibe coding or AI or whatever can make slop, but it can't make soulful things.

>> You have made one of the most you've certainly made the most soulful vibe coded seen. If if that's um

coded seen. If if that's um >> right, you just >> you need to put your soul in this. You

need to care about every detail. You you

need to not accept whatever great uh purple gradient the AI gave you as the end.

>> Like that is just the beginning.

>> Ah yes.

>> You always start with [ __ ] You always start with slob with AI >> and then you refine it. You make

>> the beginning not the end.

>> Yeah. You you just poke at it with little prompts >> and then it'll get better.

>> It'll take some turns.

You say uh in the age of AI the question everyone's asking is will I be replaced.

The real question is do you know yourself well enough to become irreplaceable?

>> I don't think we're through with technique and skill and craft and mastery. Um I am curious if there are

mastery. Um I am curious if there are any of those that you think are worth mastering now. But it seems to me that

mastering now. But it seems to me that it's actually more about what you might call intuition or sensibility.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

>> What can you talk about that? Like what

what goes into that? Because that feels like the it's not the end, it's the beginning.

>> The beginning feels like I don't like the purple slop.

>> Uhhuh.

>> That's like I know what I like and I know incrementally what I like.

>> Right.

>> True. It's like the AI models are trained on all the public knowledge information and the code that I can see.

And you are trained on the same thing like all the books you've read, all the fonts that you know, all the artists that you admire,

the world around you, and you build that intuition or taste or whatever, and you start forming an opinion about how you want to shape the world.

And you you express it by building Yeah, that's what it is. Like

>> not by thinking by the way.

>> Yeah. Not by thinking. Not just

thinking.

Then it's like you have to keep making things and keep looking at things.

>> Yeah. One of the things that get missed in the when people talk about taste is taste is eating food.

>> Yes.

>> Stop thinking about food.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You need to keep uh eating and making [ __ ] Yeah.

>> And then make the [ __ ] better and better.

>> M.

You critique design as aesthetics, I think, a lot, but you're also like very attuned to aesthetics.

>> Yeah.

>> Rios is like the most specific thing ever. Like you've perfectly handcrafted,

ever. Like you've perfectly handcrafted, recreated Aqua among many other things.

Like what is the maybe it's back to this taste thing, but like what is your relationship to sort of like not holding aesthetics too

tightly, but also still clearly really putting a ton of time and effort and energy and thought into >> I think it's like it's like how you present things

visually will always be there and like I don't really think about it anymore. You just start noticing like

anymore. You just start noticing like this feels off, this feels wrong.

[clears throat] >> And once you you have almost like a a set of patterns, then you don't really think about it anymore.

Um, unless it's like something new that you want to stress on or you want to like put a little bit more flare into it. Um, but it's like all the

foundational bricks, they need to fit perfectly even in the visual space. It's like the visual

visual space. It's like the visual space, the the the bricks are it's like the color, the spacing, the layout, the grid,

the different like type type scale, font sizes and all of that.

>> It's sort of part of the It's part of the big picture.

>> Yeah. It's part of it. It's more like one layer of it. Yeah. Yeah.

>> But it's like ideally the thing is also constructed in a way that it's like

like it's almost like the simplest form for the low-level ideas that you want to convey.

>> Yeah. I like that. It's a it's a it's they're compressed.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's like compression to pixels. What are they?

to pixels. What are they?

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah. Yeah. [snorts] Um in the >> so you you still think about it but you don't think about it too much.

>> Yeah. [clears throat]

>> Once you're over >> it has its hierarchy. It has it role in the hierarchy.

>> Right. And I also dislike how people think of them separately sometimes. It's

like so at Google they have like interaction designers and visual designers. They're split [snorts] and

designers. They're split [snorts] and that's bad.

Then you create a world where the visual designers only think about how the button looks and then they fight >> not what it looks like to press the button >> or um >> or feels like I should say

>> like how should the buttons be fit fitted together. Why is there so many

fitted together. Why is there so many buttons?

>> Yeah. Yeah. You're always backing into this. You need to have the cohes the

this. You need to have the cohes the cohesion in mind when you're in the micro.

>> Yeah.

It's like um I don't know you in that in that greatness piece you wrote about focus and breath like we're taught to focus early, choose what's important, discard what's peripheral, the genesis

of a thing that might be great. Um

strict focus is a ruse. The treasure

lies in expansive searching and stitching together tapestry of interrelated issues. Later, once you

interrelated issues. Later, once you roam far enough, clarity will guide you toward the right edges. Until then, let curiosity roam. And it almost feels like

curiosity roam. And it almost feels like that is going in two axes, which is >> the axes of like incremental new thing and the axes of like hierarchy and cohesion.

>> Yeah.

>> You do that at the same time >> and that's why it's chaotic.

>> Yeah.

>> And ambiguous.

>> Yeah. Yeah. And you have to rein it in with the order and >> Yeah. Yeah. Like when people try to put

>> Yeah. Yeah. Like when people try to put this into like a linear process or order, they just [ __ ] it up.

>> Yeah.

because there's no more like emergence.

>> Do you think that one view just says that like Google doesn't have >> realoo or whatever and pick your favorite designer? Another view that

favorite designer? Another view that says the people at Google are talented and actually like they are their system is failing them. Yes.

>> Seems like you think the latter.

>> I think the latter >> and I think say a tool like cursor or its ideal form can help with this. M

>> meaning like people with different roles or they're kind of stuck in boxes right now.

>> Yeah.

>> You just break the box >> and let them build the thing they want.

>> Yeah.

>> Uh another part of that essay on greatness uh pursue agility and quality in equal measure.

>> Mhm.

>> The myth says you must choose move quickly and break things or move slowly and ensure elegance. But genuine

excellence emerges from a dance between speed and depth, agility and quality. I

love this. Like a skilled musician who can improvise yet still maintain impeccable technique. Yes.

impeccable technique. Yes.

>> You must learn to adapt fluidly without compromising the integrity of the final piece.

>> Yeah.

>> I'm curious how this this dance it makes sense to me that it could happen working solo on a short-term project without that much of a plan, maybe Rio. How does

that happen maybe at other modalities either with wide collaboration or let's say you're working on cursor 2.0 and it's this big long-term project. How do

you how do you embody that in that type of context?

>> It's kind of like the you let chaos be and you wrangle it at the same time or it's like you're you're

You don't pick size, you find like a equilibrium.

>> Yeah. Between the complexity and the simplicity.

>> And same thing with like how much fast you want to go versus like how much thinking do you want to do.

>> And I think especially in this age, it's actually so easy to just try try things out.

>> Maybe it starts with so much. In so many of your answers, it starts with just saying like it doesn't have to be a choice. Like you're allowed to do both.

choice. Like you're allowed to do both.

Oh, yeah. They're the same thing.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's like

people get stuck thinking like they need to pick sides or they need to make these hard tradeoffs when all of these are just like variables and you can

>> add a little bit here, lower a little bit here.

>> Um, it's all dynamic. You want to be more flexible to the situation you're in and the change that's coming.

Um, you don't want your system to be stale or stuck in like a form that you can't get out as the world is changing.

Um, you want to keep the essence clean and simple. you won't create like a space

simple. you won't create like a space for people to play with ideas so they can ship really fast, but maybe it doesn't disrupt like the rest of the

system as much. And then once you have say more more room or even like you're constantly doing this like ah let's wrangle things back, let's like unify

things, then you keep the core system better as you add more things or as you experiment with more things.

Yeah. It's like a complex system can actually be quite high quality and fast if its parts are simple.

>> Yes.

>> Yeah.

>> Yet we build all this complexity and scaffolding and arbit bureaucracy whatever all these things that all these shoulds, >> right? And ideally you'd actually get

>> right? And ideally you'd actually get rid of all that all of that crap that is not even part of the system >> the software itself.

>> Yeah. It's bloke.

>> Yeah. It's like everything around it, the processes, a lot of it just don't make sense or they slow things down. They slow this

loop down. Like

loop down. Like >> you have an idea to see it real to you test it out and then you iterate on it.

>> How does this How many people are cursor now?

>> 300.

>> And you were obviously in notion for a long period of that growth like >> Yeah.

>> How does when cursor is 3,000 people >> Uhhuh. How does this not happen? You

>> Uhhuh. How does this not happen? You

guys like you you don't really have that much of a road map.

>> The the planner agent will be ready by then. [laughter]

then. [laughter] And then multiplayer cursor will be there.

>> Yeah, >> fair enough.

>> Then people can be still like pretty like I think how cursor does it really fast and pretty good is like a lot of people we hire, they're just really high

agency people. They were like founders

agency people. They were like founders before that have made stuff before. They

just want to build. They don't want to think too much.

>> Sure. But that maybe that works with that definitely works with 30. Maybe

that works with 300.

>> Yeah. Yeah.

>> All wisdom would say that doesn't work with 3,000. Even if you had 3,000 Steve

with 3,000. Even if you had 3,000 Steve Jobs, it would actually be a disaster.

>> Yeah. I'm not sure. I think that is actually one part of the it's like a part of the questions we need to answer which is like in this new

world of building with AI, how do teams work?

And I think it won't be that like it won't be too close to what we had before like layers of management and linear processes.

>> It's probably not going to be that. So

what is it?

Um how do you like both make sure like people are kind of aligned on the general direction but each person have agency each person can

build whatever they want to an extent have system to kind of manage this and help people control >> making sure that these people are actually talking to each other and share

the same information when they do stuff like that's the main problem we have Now I think it's like

people are so so distraught.

They talk to their own teams that are created like with row boundaries.

They work in their own files, own tools.

One thing that maybe helps that I you also have in that essay is about the quality of a team. You say the team that molds greatness is not a conscript army

but a band of pilgrims. Mh.

>> Such people don't hide behind process or hire.

>> Oh yeah.

>> What does it feel like when you meet a group of people, you're in a room or you're in a visit an office or when you first kind of met the cursor people or whatever.

>> What is how do you know? How do you how can you tell that it's a band of pilgrims?

>> Just see what they're doing and what they care about. You ask them why are they here and then they tell you cuz I love programming.

They just like doing this thing like they're into it. They're

passionate.

>> They care deeply and they want to make the best thing and they want to put the work in it. and you

see it like they don't talk about I don't know equity or whatever you know investment or I don't know they talk

about like the latest models the the the new ideas they exchange their ideas

and they're there for quite a long time every Okay.

And they're doing that like not being forced.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah.

[snorts] >> Uh on the note of of the sort of essay about making something great.

>> Mhm.

>> Uh do you aspire to greatness?

>> Oh yeah.

>> What does that mean for you?

To me, it means like you make something that helps a lot of people that lasts and ideally is like pretty close to the

ideal configuration of the thing.

>> Yeah. That truth, the tress we talked about, >> right? But sometimes you fake it. It's

>> right? But sometimes you fake it. It's

like sometimes we make the upper layer really nice and pretty and cohesive, but under the hood is like chaos, >> but that's fine. You you just you do that like slowly.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah. It's like the I don't know the the picture of the SpaceX rocket, the first SpaceX or the iPhone, the same like the iPhone Air now is like >> Oh, yeah. Like if even if you look at the inside, it's like so pretty.

>> Yeah. Yeah. I saw your you I want the clear iPhone air too. That would be amazing.

H I have we have a little time left, so I have a bunch of like quick speed round questions. We can we we can we don't

questions. We can we we can we don't have to take super long on each one.

>> First off, maybe it relates to your last answer.

>> What does it mean for technology to feel more human?

Not exactly the easiest speed round answer or question, but >> I think it should like [snorts] fit each human better and it's different for everyone.

Like some people prefer something really simple, some people actually want to see everybody.

Uh some people like talking, some people like reading, some people like like watching YouTube tutorials, some people like uh going to a course, >> buying a book.

>> It's fit. It's about personal connection.

>> It's about like fitting the human in the way they do things, >> not in the way like I do things.

>> Yeah. or like our engineers do things.

>> Those can be like good examples.

>> Um, >> and as it, you know, as it fits you better it inevitably needs to understand you

better. Um, your preferences of

better. Um, your preferences of even like your way of thinking, your how you talk and the things you care about. It's like

almost being seen by a a design or a product >> or like when you do it, it just feels like like you're in flow and you don't think. Kind

of like how I use Figma.

>> Yeah.

>> But that took like years of training.

>> Yes.

>> But now it's like maybe a couple tries you you were like there.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah. you write a lot and you clearly are really thoughtful about how what not only what you have to say about cursor publicly but the narrative and the conversation around cursor.

>> Um we we spoke about this briefly and you said like tools are all selling ideas. They're all attaching themselves

ideas. They're all attaching themselves to ideas. There's a lineage of ideas

to ideas. There's a lineage of ideas they're they're sort of pointing at.

>> How you talk about tools matters tremendously. You have to plant seeds.

tremendously. You have to plant seeds.

>> What do you mean by planting seeds and like how how do you think about shaping what people think and perceive about cursor? Right.

cursor? Right.

Yeah. I think

like software to me kind of like what we said that's just like a tree of concepts packaged up in a word cursor or notion.

Notion is blocks, pages, databases.

Cursor is agents, models, context and editors maybe.

Um, but you also want to like create something like it's like a brand that lasts

that is not just your present form that is a little bigger that ties with

the past and the future. M

>> um and that is definitely not say cursor is the AI coded. [laughter] Um it is not even like say a cursor makes you

extraordinary productive.

It is bigger.

>> Yeah.

>> And then you want to tell the bigger story and then you want to also like tell smaller stories to like different groups of people.

>> Right. Right.

>> But tie them all together.

>> Yeah. It's almost like it's like the tool. itself or the product is like the

tool. itself or the product is like the ship and the story is like we're going to the Americas or something like >> you having that broader context is important. People attach a lot of

important. People attach a lot of identity to the things they use to to make things.

>> Yep. Like I think it's actually >> a service like we need to do more of this um

to kind of paint a picture for people to see how we came here.

>> Yeah. and how these things are actually the same things, same ideas, how the ideas originated, how they kind of interweaved.

>> Yes. Well, that's important with AI especially. Yeah. It's so alienating to

especially. Yeah. It's so alienating to people.

>> A lot of people like now when they start, they actually just start from like now. Now, they don't see the the

like now. Now, they don't see the the past. They don't know how we came here

past. They don't know how we came here >> or they're living in the past and they're like, I don't like this future.

>> They're stuck in the in the past and they don't know how this future can take them.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um, you

said you there was a tweet where you said you were talking about a bunch of things. You said don't build slot

things. You said don't build slot machines and a few people accused cursor of being a slot machine, right?

>> Um, what do you say to that?

>> I don't think cursor is a slot machine because slot machines they don't let you open it up.

>> It's closed black box. But cursor is like I actually don't want your primary way to interface with cursor to be like kind

of like say cloud code or codeex CLI is like you're in a terminal you're in this little box and then you're kind of constrained in just like that input and you're just typing the thing in a little

box and then enter and see what happens.

Wait for a little bit, see what happens versus like in cursor like that is say it is possible and you can do it like

that but it that is just like one form of it.

>> It's the beginning.

>> Yeah. Or like you will just naturally hit these ah I see a code block maybe I want to click and then see what's in it.

Ah I'm like done with this chat. I hit

this review button and then now I see all the things. Um, and it slowly teaches you say like now we're doing code reviews. We're going to stitch the

code reviews. We're going to stitch the agent reviews with the code review with get and you know all the other stuff.

Then as a new newcomer even like you come in and then you started with a simple thing you slowly get to the like if you want like I don't force you

either right it's like if you don't want to open the code you don't have to and >> keep hitting the slot machine if you want. if you want that is fine. And I

want. if you want that is fine. And I

don't think that's a slot machine either. Again, it's like it's

either. Again, it's like it's customizable.

It's open. You can open it up. You can

do whatever to it.

>> Um even in the simple form, you can still customize the thing. Um

and you have full control and you have the whole spectrum of control from like the most manual coding which is you just type and it's still your thing. I don't

do anything to like you type and then our tab model is still the world best thing. You type and then boom it kind of

thing. You type and then boom it kind of completes your thought. It jumps you to the next place. You keep going. So if

you prefer that and you're like in your flow state there, you should keep doing that.

Um and then for say like there's now like a small chunk of like professional developers who have became very agent

coded >> like they don't do manual coding as much or >> then for them it's like we have tools for them to focus on one agent spend

multiple agents manage them at a higher level and um then you get the whole spectrum And for these people again, it's like they

can find their preferred spot and then they can open it up and do more if they want. But I don't force them to be like,

want. But I don't force them to be like, "Ah, you're always in this little box."

And then all you can do is >> put the prom in a little box, see what happens.

>> Is there a pattern from Stripe to notion to cursor as you've spent most of the last decade?

Yeah, I don't see them as too different either or like they're actually very similar. Like

Stripe to me is just passing messages around the internet, but the messages are transactions or money related.

Notion is just like basically like the meta SAS tool kind of databases and all the archetypes of views and

patterns.

cursor brings it more lowle but it's also more flexible like you actually break all of these patterns and parts completely

and at some point like you will get it composed by the AI or with our like presets or something so you get the toy you want.

>> Yeah. You have a line somewhere where you say building stuff that frees up people's minds and it felt like that's kind of true for all those three things.

>> Yeah. It's like helping people make make the thing they they want.

>> What did you learn from what did you and what have you learned from the notion founders and the cursor founders respectively or maybe even Stripe?

>> From Ivan's like I think he kind of showed like system thinking and aesthetics can be melded together >> like you don't have to pick.

>> Wow.

And then from cursor people, it's just like you should just yolo and do stuff and don't think too much and keep doing it.

>> Ambitious naivity.

>> Yeah. And exactly. It's like that is actually so so good in this age because actually nobody knows what they're doing, >> right?

Like all the old ways of doing things don't really apply anymore.

M what what do you love about Steve Jobs?

>> I love him as it's almost like a it's like a spiritual figure kind of like I don't I'm not religious but I feel like some sometimes people

need like a psychos thing there and I kind of put this as a symbol there. Mhm.

[clears throat] >> Um, that helps me a lot.

>> What does that symbol represent?

>> It's like forcing you to be thinking about everything, all the details, and coming up with the simplest thing.

>> Yeah. And he kind of helped me start all of this.

Like he got me into design or like you know the old Apple. Yeah.

like they showed how like computers can be beautiful.

>> Maybe on that note, what is the difference to you between liquid glass and aqua? [laughter]

and aqua? [laughter] >> I mean, like aqua is more like what they were trying to do was like they bring a lot of like the physical

metaphors into the computer. Yeah.

>> So that people feel more familiar with things. Like if you look at all the

things. Like if you look at all the icons, they almost look at like they look like the emojis we use today.

>> Like they're super detailed.

>> Yeah.

>> Like with real world like reflections and material.

>> Yeah.

>> Um >> and it it's like back in the days it looks completely different from say the gray boxes people used >> like the beveled like 3D buttons and

stuff.

So that was like pretty gamechanging.

>> They also mastered like how to render fonts. Like back then how Aqua was made,

fonts. Like back then how Aqua was made, it's like all just kind of PDFs rendered on on your screen. Um you can stretch

the UI like freely. The text was not like, you know, in like bit map little pixels, but like like it's all like anti-aliased

like perfect liquid glass almost feels like it's almost like a flex on what Apple can do [laughter] now.

And it's kind of weird.

>> It's like [clears throat] I get the point. And it's like they're trying to like unify the design language across all of their platforms coming up with like one thing, but it's like how you use the phone

versus how you use the Vision Pro when you stare at things and then you know they need to track your eye, your finger and your little pointer on the mouse button. They're all different.

button. They're all different.

So your interface probably can't be the same same but they try to make it the same thing same. And then this material even though it's like you know inspired by glass is purely digital

they're just flexing that they can build like system level shaders and make them performant across every single like UI and then my menus can morph uh into a

button and out from the button.

But then to the users like what's the point?

>> Yeah. It's just

>> it actually makes like it makes a lot of the UI like >> like you can't see much anymore or like the the tabs take so much space like you

need to keep clearance >> for for the tabs the their shadows the little blur under it.

>> So you actually like when you compare the old iOS and the new one you actually see less text or like there's like less stuff you can do. So maybe like the

priorities have changed. Like instead of being truthful to the platform themselves and the way you interact with it, either it's a finger or your eye or your little pointer that have different

precision. Let's just like make

precision. Let's just like make everything the same.

>> I I have to stop you because I know you can rant about this all day. I I'm I'm really good at finding things to get my guests to rant about in the last few minutes. Uh just a couple more

minutes. Uh just a couple more questions. I know I had to get this one

questions. I know I had to get this one in. What makes New Jeans stand out in a

in. What makes New Jeans stand out in a world of factory farmed cable?

>> Ah, I think it's the same idea. Like I

think all of the things that we make, the new things are just kind of remixes of the old things. And what New Jeans did was they just mix things really well

>> and then they give these girls like a space to just be themselves and have fun. And that's why like it feels so

fun. And that's why like it feels so different from like all these scripted manufactured like K-pop songs um that were

almost like most you know people they're just kind of mixing a lot of crazy things together now whereas like new jeans they're more

like softful and so again it's like about taste and Yeah.

>> Like the constraint.

>> Yeah. K-pop some in some ways K-pop can feel like it's just like what does the algorithm want?

>> Yeah.

>> Just give >> Yeah. Like you find like a concept and

>> Yeah. Like you find like a concept and then you kind of like what they do is they get a lot of sound writers and they buy a lot of songs and then they're just like, "Oh, let's like mix these parts or

mix these genres." Boom.

>> Put the English Korean Japanese lyric together. Boom. H what uh can you say

together. Boom. H what uh can you say something about uhangji's butterfly dream?

>> Oh butterfly dream.

It's like life in a sense is like like reality is not that real and it's like a lot of it is just in your head.

Um, so sometimes you feel like it's so almost like you're you're living in a dream where you can

actually mold anything.

>> It's the old Steve Jobs video. It's like

when you figure out that the world is >> moldable and plastic, you can poke it and you get feedback back.

>> Yeah.

>> And it's like the the butterfly And sometimes you you just let things go and see how it how it happens.

And sometimes you go back and you take control.

>> Like you wake up from the dream or sometimes you're >> in between dream and reality.

>> Yeah.

>> We're always all doing that by the way.

We're on autopilot and we're not.

>> Yeah.

I was talking to Rio Oas >> and I was talking to Steve Jobs, Pope Francis and Rio >> and Pope the Pope said something about a revolution of tenderness.

>> Oh.

>> And Steve was skeptical. So I asked Rio what tenderness means to him.

>> Uhhuh.

>> He said, "Tenderness to me is when a system or tool feels intuitive, almost invisible, making things smooth and delightful. It's the empathy baked into

delightful. It's the empathy baked into the design."

the design." >> Right? We didn't talk a lot about

>> Right? We didn't talk a lot about empathy today, although I think it's kind of running in the background of our conversation. It's clear you are deeply

conversation. It's clear you are deeply empathetic to the people uh you care about, which is I think people who make things.

>> What does IRL Rio think about tenderness?

tenderness just like putting the care into things and people you meet and the people we serve.

um being truthful that like you know the ideas that we work with or the technology even is like

universal is general is like generalizable.

It's not exclusive to like a group of people.

Um and you can always start by like like you understand what you need, what you are frustrated with and then you

find a group of people who are maybe similar to you. So like the people working at a cursor and they all share similar problems

and they you know make stuff for themselves and make this tool and then it's about like how do we bring

it out to more people like us or even beyond people like us and that's maybe like the next breakthrough will be it's like

like the vibe coding tools and the pro coding tools today are still very split like it's really hard for

like the non-technical people to come into cursor today but also very hard for them to like progress from a vibe coding thing to a real thing.

So maybe we can help with that. Um, we

can help with it's like turning the designers into coders, the PMs into coders, the coders into designers.

>> It's all the same thing.

>> It's all the same thing. And we start realizing, oh, we can actually like we don't have to like put boxes around our heads or our eyes. We can actually do

things. we can do things better with

things. we can do things better with other people who have say different areas of specialization but we're all thinking about the same thing

and people don't have to fight [snorts] um like instead of fighting about I don't

know bureaucracy you fight about the truth like what is the best thing to do what is the ideal configuration of the thing we're doing together.

And you're helping people erase all the parts in their job that they don't really like doing.

You help people like amplify their strength, like what they care about, what they're really good at, and you help meld these people's

strength together, and then the agent covers the rest.

Yeah.

Real Lou.

>> Yeah.

>> Thank you very much.

>> Thank you.