Isn't that up to the reader/visitor/user to decide? As it stands right now, Cursor are publishing results they won't say how they got them, and compares them against aggregate scores we don't know the true results of, and you're saying "it doesn't matter, the tool is better anyways".

Then why publish the obscured benchmarks in the first place then?

More like looking a thin net preventing mosquitoes from biting your skin, as there is some intention behind it, not just physics.

Don't we have more internet submarine cables and less single points of failure in our internet infrastructure today than years ago? If so, shouldn't that make it easier to route around failures?

The web though I agree isn't very decentralized.

> IOW, they're not dumping, they're doing the opposite. I don't know why.

If they're doing the opposite yet end up a lot cheaper with higher quality and more features, I'm really not sure what's going on. Don't see how they could be cheaper either.