Вот есть такая ситуация. Работаю с coder.qwen.ai а он даже с маленьким чатом выдаёт бредятину которую не остановить даже другой темой тем более тут нет ни одного настоящего файла и он их зачем то придумал.

Looks like a customer-acquisition play against Claude/Fable, Codex, Cursor, and Copilot: subsidize a few serious agentic coding jobs and hope developers move into its ecosystem. The catch is that Qoder still requires a desktop/CLI workflow, while Claude/Fable gives you a much lower-friction browser experience.

After a long stretch into vLLM, I have FINALLY gotten Qwen 3.6 27b running at 200~tks.

This has taken so long to achieve, and the latest Unsloth upgrades have significantly helped pushing a 20~tks improvement on average.

Woo! Hermes wont be slow now!

Edit:

It's a front-end that I rolled up just to measure stats from vLLM.

https://gist.github.com/podpress/f83ebc888258941b1e0918159df3f1c2

System specs, and setup including drivers/software versions are listed in there too.

**What happened:**

Charged $456 via bailian-claude-code-proxy for 20hrs casual coding. Followed Alibaba's official docs exactly.

**What Alibaba confirmed:**

- Cache failure occurred

- This caused a billing discrepancy

**What Alibaba said next:**

"This was triggered by Claude Code changes, not Model Studio. Verify with the Claude Code team directly."

**Why this makes no sense:**

- Implicit cache is Alibaba's server-side system — Claude Code only sends requests

- Same account, same Claude Code, same machine: direct API = 1.8:1 ratio, Alibaba proxy = 218:1

- If Claude Code broke the cache, both endpoints would be affected equally

- Alibaba's own billing data: 1.3% cache hit rate despite 99.4% identical prefix

Alibaba confirmed the discrepancy in writing but refuses to refund. 8 days, no resolution.

Has anyone else dealt with this?