Ppl ask why Claude Code > Cursor.
As an IDE > vim guy, I was surprised too. My take after 1m:
- CC is linear, takes less mental load. You're in the driver seat but it's on autopilot. Much easier to follow.
- Cursor's edit models are sh*t and will introduce random changes that you don't need.
- Cursor's "accept" flow is broken, and gets you confused fast.
- CC has planning mode, forces you to frame your needs well and puts the agent on a good track.
I personally don't think CC is def. > Cursor, and still go back to Cursor often. And to my good ol' PyCharm too!!
🧵 Is AI ready for patients?
Today we're publishing the first ever large-scale study of conversational medical AI in real-world conditions.
Meet Mo, our AI medical assistant, deployed in our medical advice chat with GPs
A thread on what we learned 👇
@GoogleAI Very excited about the prospective real-world evaluation.
Hopefully it confirms the results we shared last week on our very similar study:
https://t.co/97vv79wpo4
🧵 Is AI ready for patients?
Today we're publishing the first ever large-scale study of conversational medical AI in real-world conditions.
Meet Mo, our AI medical assistant, deployed in our medical advice chat with GPs
A thread on what we learned 👇
@ADarmouni@Gorintic@avec_alan Yes
Longer answer: sourcing doesn't really matter in convos, few people use it. Building our own models (further training & fine tuning) to improve parts of the system is def a strategy we've taken. RAG is important in doing so.
Read the research paper for:
Detailed methodology
Safety protocols
Real-world deployment learnings
Future research priorities
Check it out here: https://t.co/vcXPyTlFcC