As the title suggests, it is indeed a very small matter, but it has sparked some thoughts in me, so it is still necessary to record it.
The origin of this matter comes from the recently (it should have been some time) highly regarded programming tool that combines AI, #Cursor. I didn't jump on the bandwagon immediately, mainly due to being busy (or lazy) lately. A couple of days ago, I found a little time, downloaded it, and since I wanted to write a small tool recently, I played around with it.
Let me explain the content of the tool I plan to write:
Using Golang, especially its multithreading feature, to quickly summarize specific areas of content from a large number (more than 10) of Excel files into a separate Excel file in a certain established format.
The original intention of this idea is that I have a little bit of 🤏Golang foundation (I can write a few Hello World programs), and the convenient implementation of multithreading in Golang, and I happen to need this tool recently. (In fact, I have already implemented it in Excel using VBA, but every time I summarize, it takes a lot of time, and the machine basically freezes during the process).
After installing Cursor, what came into view was an editor almost similar to VS Code, which left me unsure of where to start. I first described my direct needs to Claude, which generated a framework that I then pasted directly into Cursor. Surprisingly, while I was typing new code, Cursor was able to provide me with suggestions that almost met my needs based on the context. With just a few tabs, I could write code blocks that would normally take me half an hour to an hour. Especially for some more common and frequently used blocks, like makefile, I created an empty makefile and then let Cursor generate the content for me. Amazingly, I hardly made any modifications, and it was ready to use. I initially just wanted to have a brief try, but unexpectedly, once I started using it, I couldn't stop, spending over 4 hours making my tool usable.
That’s the background of my attempt with Cursor. Now, let’s talk about the main content of this small matter.
I have a tech-savvy friend (an architect at a software service provider in a certain industry) with whom I often discuss related technical topics and industry matters, and we generally get along well. One day after I tried Cursor, I ran into him while having coffee, and I excitedly talked to him about this tool. Before I could elaborate too much, he interrupted my enthusiastic explanation and poured out his opposing views.
- "The premise of these tools is that you have to upload almost all your code, which is very unsafe and could even involve legal issues."
- "If used internally in a company, it will definitely involve copyright issues, which could lead to legal disputes."
- "For example, when you install software, if you don't restrict privacy, you'll naturally feel that the other party knows you very well and can predict what you want to do next. Isn't this similar to PDD, etc.?"
- "These things can only serve as references; they are fundamentally untrustworthy. They are not as smart as you think; their output entirely depends on the data fed into them, and since humans make mistakes, machines will definitely have problems too."
- "Look, our country has now banned these AIs, which is clear evidence that the government has recognized the issues involved."
- "This is even scarier than bypassing the Great Firewall!"
The above quotes may differ slightly from his original words; I might have missed or confused some terms, but the general meaning should align. His outpouring of views, which I couldn't refute or explain, left me quite astonished, particularly his resistance to AI. I believe he may not have used generative AI at all, or very rarely; and he probably hasn't even touched tools like Cursor, yet he made these sweeping judgments.
In my judgment, a good technical expert should have an open-minded attitude towards new technologies and should actively try them out. Of course, any new technology will have its advantages and disadvantages, or shortcomings; we cannot completely deny something just because of some flaws and issues. A conversation that lasted less than ten minutes changed my long-standing reliance on his opinions. I couldn't persuade him, or rather, I didn't want to; I don't know when it started, but I have become unwilling to convince others. I thought of some other topics and hurriedly ended the discussion on this topic. I probably won't bring up discussions about such tools in front of him again.