u/LearnedByError

Edit Start:

I decided to keep the title as short as I could. Given some of the replies, a better title would be: Cursor, no longer for AI assisted development, now for vibecoders. Today, I write code myself when needed. For the majority of code, I provide an engineering framework for coding assistants to develop within and give them structured requirements to deliver. I may be old, but I'm not a total luddite!

Edit End

Am I alone in believing that Cursor is being optimized for vibe coders and abandoning its AI assisted coding roots or am I just naive in believing that it every had those roots?

Seemingly daily for the past two weeks, I have been encountering issues with Cursor using Composer 2.5 where it has deviated from plans, made unilateral design changes and then committed those changes with little or no notification that it changed the plan. These plans explicitly state: "Deviating from the plan is **NOT** allowed. If you need to deviate, **STOP** immediately and notify the user."

When I query the agent afterwards to explain why it deviated from plan, I get answer back like this verbatim quote that I just received: "That was me choosing “ship green” over literal plan compliance and your approval."

With behavior like this, what good are Cursor rules, AGENTS.md, skills or even prompts as far as that goes. This is the model saying, I am smarter than you and I do not care what guard rails you put in place to insure the result that you want, I'm going to do whatever I "think" and "deem" best.

This behavior is not limited to Composer 2.5 though I see it there more often because I use it as my worker model most times. I have seen it in Grok also. I can't speak for using it with non-Cursor/Xai models as I don't generally use them in Cursor very often. I use other tools when I need them.

Am I the only one seeing this insolent behavior?

Do you have methods that have proven to work for you that prevent this bovine excrement?

Thanks in advance, lbe

If you use WASM in Go, you have probably been following u/ncruces' wasm2go which transpiles a .wasm file to a pure Go package. You may have noticed that it does not include a WASI host interface for use case needing one.

Announcing wasm2go-wasi-host, a bolt-on WASI Preview 1 host layer for Go-based WebAssembly runtimes. The goal is to provide a standards-based implementation that emphasizes correctness, reliability, and robustness rather than just passing basic demos.

This project incorporates proven code and design lessons from wazero, including components that have already seen extensive real-world use and testing.

Three points worth calling out are:

1. Standards-based. Implements all 40 WASI Preview1 functions. Passes all 72 wasm32-wasip1 tests from the official wasi-testsuite.
2. Reliability over everything. The filesystem layer is capability-oriented (no access without a preopen), path confinement is done properly, and read-only vs writable mounts are kept strictly separate.
3. Built on wazero's guts. The VFS layer and a big chunk of the WASI internals (internal/wasi/, internal/wasi/sysfs/) are directly copied or slightly adapted from wazero. This is code that is production hardened from years of use.

The dependencies are stdlib and x/sys.

This code has been heavily tested on Linux and Macos. I have a goal to add Windows and other platforms in the near future.

It's beta right now. The API is stable and fully documented in GoDoc, I've ported a handful of my own projects and a small number of 3rd party Go packages to it. So far, I have found no issues, but it needs more eyes on it.

Please try to break it. I welcome critical feedback, bugs, missing edge cases, design complaints, API friction — whatever you've got. I am especially curious about any filesystem behaviour that works fine on wazero or Wasmtime but does not work here.

Thank you! lbe

Has anyone else encountered this error when using Z.ai GLM-5.1 on their coding plan?

Error: 429 Your account's current usage pattern does not comply with the Fair Usage Policy, and your request frequency has been limited. For details, please refer to 

the Subscription Service Agreement. To restore access, please submit a request.

I created a ticket with them and received a long automated response 2 days later. The core of it is the following list of common reasons for account suspension:

1. Using unofficial methods to invoke the Coding plan: Other third-party tools, self-made tools that are not introduced in the official tutorial may consider as a violation of usage rules.
2. Abnormally high-frequency requests: Sending an extremely large number of requests in a short period will be flagged as a malicious attack, resulting in an account ban.
3. Account sharing: Suspicious activities indicating that multiple users are sharing a single account
4. Unauthorized reselling: Accounts suspected of selling or transferring Coding plan quotas without authorization.

For 1.: Pi is not listed on the official tutorial

For 2: I have hit my 5 hour or weekly quota a few times in the 3 months. that I have used Z.ai GLM; however, there are also days that go by where I don't use it at all. I have come no where near hitting my monthly quota.

I have not engaged in 3 or 4 at all.

My accounts rebills for the next period on May 3, tomorrow. If this is not addressed today, which it probably won't since it is Saturday, I'll be moving to a different provider.