Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jgbuddy 84 days ago
Worth noting that this model, unlike almost all qwen models, is not open-weight, nor is the parameter count exposed. Also odd that it is compared against opus 4.5 even though 4.6 was released like 2 months ago.
4 comments

They said in the last paragraph[0]:

"[...] In the coming days, we will also open-source smaller-scale variants, reaffirming our commitment to accessibility and community-driven innovation. [...]"

[0] https://qwen.ai/blog?id=qwen3.6#summary--future-work

> we will also open-source smaller-scale variants

In other words, like GP said, this Qwen3.6-Plus model is not open-weight unlike the other Qwen models.

In a practical sense, I'm primarily interested in small to medium sized models being open. I think that might be common sentiment.

However, my hope is that there will be at least somewhat competitive big and open models as well, from an ethical/ideological perspective. These things were trained on data that was provided by people without their consent, so they should at least be be publicly accessible or even public domain.

Qwen3.5-Plus is the largest variant of the open weight Qwen3.5 model, expanded with a 1M context window and fine-tuned on the Qwen-native harness’ specific tools.
> unlike almost all qwen models

Almost all means there have been ones before that were not open. So, no contradiction there.

> unlike the other Qwen models

Please send the download link for qwen 3.5-plus.

Also, who cares? If you have the hardware to run a ~400b model i don’t think you count as a home user anymore.

So the Qwen3.6-Plus model is like the Qwen3.5-Plus model?
Qwen 3.5 Plus was closed weights too. It was supposedly the same model as Qwen3.5 397B, just with 1 million context size and only available on the API and their website.
If Opus 4.6 was only released two months ago, then it seems reasonable that Qwen hasn't finished fully comparing against the latest Opus.
Well don't we have numbers from both models on these benchmarks already? What else is there to do except include them in the table?
Do we? I admit ignorance in this.
I wouldn't say "almost all" seeing as -MAX and -Omni models were always closed.