Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 235 posts

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#71

Post by senordevnyc »

jjice wrote: post #34
PhilippGille wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The OpenRouter usage stats indicate the opposite: https://openrouter.ai/rankings?view=month

OpenRouter usage is likely skewed towards LLMs that are more niche and/or self-hostable by solid hardware that's available, but most consumers don't have on hand. I can imagine Anthropic and OpenAI LLMs often get called directly from their APIs instead. At least from my experience and friends of mine, we use OpenRouter for cases where we want to use smaller LLMs like Qwen, but when I've used ChatGPT and Claude, I use…

Same, and my little SaaS is pushing more than 0.1% of the TOTAL volume of tokens on OpenRouter, so the reality is they’re TINY.

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#72

Post by [deleted] »

Alifatisk wrote: post #70
nickvec wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s more the principle of deception that upsets people. Imagine if Apple released a new iPhone and publicly compared its specs to some previous gen Android. It’s not in good faith.

Why are we so quick to call it deception? Their figure is quite clear. They aren't fiddling with the graph or hiding the labels, they are clearly stating which models it compares against. But I agree on the sentiment that the standard practice should be to bench against the latest SOTA models.

[deleted]

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#73

Post by cieplok »

dev_l1x_be wrote: post #49
Aurornis wrote: post #11

This is their hosted-only model, not an open weight model like they’ve become known for. They got a lot of good publicity for their open weight model releases, which was the goal. The hard part is pivoting from an open weight provider to being considered as a competitor to Claude and ChatGPT. Initial reactions are mostly anger from everyone who didn’t realize that the play along was to give away the smaller models as…

How stupid somebody has to be to mix up Opus with Qwen?

OP didn't say about confusing Opus with Qwen but rather people being confused about Qwen3.6-Plus not being available as an "open weight" model available for self hosting.

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#74

Post by patates »

Alifatisk wrote: post #70
nickvec wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s more the principle of deception that upsets people. Imagine if Apple released a new iPhone and publicly compared its specs to some previous gen Android. It’s not in good faith.

Why are we so quick to call it deception? Their figure is quite clear. They aren't fiddling with the graph or hiding the labels, they are clearly stating which models it compares against. But I agree on the sentiment that the standard practice should be to bench against the latest SOTA models.

Even if openly stated, why would they be comparing to a previous generation if not for deception?

Laziness? Lack of time? It's not like the latest generation of the SOTA models were released yesterday.

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#75

Post by true_religion »

Aurornis wrote: post #11

This is their hosted-only model, not an open weight model like they’ve become known for. They got a lot of good publicity for their open weight model releases, which was the goal. The hard part is pivoting from an open weight provider to being considered as a competitor to Claude and ChatGPT. Initial reactions are mostly anger from everyone who didn’t realize that the play along was to give away the smaller models as…

Opus was released in Feb 2026. Even though it feels like a long 2 months has passed, its' not really clear that they were developing this as a competitor to that product.

There's nothing really strange about not competing directly with the best, but rather showing whom you are as good as.

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#76

Post by Gracana »

jstummbillig wrote: post #64
Aurornis wrote: post #11

This is their hosted-only model, not an open weight model like they’ve become known for. They got a lot of good publicity for their open weight model releases, which was the goal. The hard part is pivoting from an open weight provider to being considered as a competitor to Claude and ChatGPT. Initial reactions are mostly anger from everyone who didn’t realize that the play along was to give away the smaller models as…

> Initial reactions are mostly anger from everyone who didn’t realize that the play along was to give away the smaller models as advertising, not because they were feeling generous. The naivety around this has been staggering quite frankly. All of a sudden, people thinking that meta etc are releasing free models because they believe in open access and distribution of knowledge. No, they just suck comparatively. There…

I don't think there's so much naivety. People can be aware of the the plan and still be frustrated and disappointed when it happens.

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#78

Post by wolvoleo »

cubefox wrote: post #17
Aurornis wrote: post #11

This is their hosted-only model, not an open weight model like they’ve become known for. They got a lot of good publicity for their open weight model releases, which was the goal. The hard part is pivoting from an open weight provider to being considered as a competitor to Claude and ChatGPT. Initial reactions are mostly anger from everyone who didn’t realize that the play along was to give away the smaller models as…

> I think there is a moderately large market for models like this that aren’t quite SOTA level but can be served up much cheaper. There isn't, pretty much everyone wants the best of the best.

Not really. It depends on the usecase. For private stuff I'm very happy to take what was SOTA a year or 2 ago if I can have it all running in my home and don't have to share any of my data with some sleazy big tech cloud.

The price is a concern too of course. But privacy is a bigger one for me. I absolutely don't trust any of their promises not to use data for training purposes.

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#79

Post by miki123211 »

Aurornis wrote: post #11

This is their hosted-only model, not an open weight model like they’ve become known for. They got a lot of good publicity for their open weight model releases, which was the goal. The hard part is pivoting from an open weight provider to being considered as a competitor to Claude and ChatGPT. Initial reactions are mostly anger from everyone who didn’t realize that the play along was to give away the smaller models as…

Ah, so that explains the recent wave of Qwen team-member departures.

Re: Qwen3.6-Plus: Towards real world agents

#80

Post by zozbot234 »

Gracana wrote: post #76
jstummbillig wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Initial reactions are mostly anger from everyone who didn’t realize that the play along was to give away the smaller models as advertising, not because they were feeling generous. The naivety around this has been staggering quite frankly. All of a sudden, people thinking that meta etc are releasing free models because they believe in open access and distribution of knowledge. No, they just suck comparatively. There…

I don't think there's so much naivety. People can be aware of the the plan and still be frustrated and disappointed when it happens.

I'm not frustrated or disappointed, we have lots of models from Qwen already. We haven't really lost anything. And plenty of players only release "smaller" models anyway, so it's hardly unprecedented.
Post reply on HN