back to top
HomeTechJust After Launching Qwen3.5, Qwen's Core Team Walked Out. Is This the...

Just After Launching Qwen3.5, Qwen’s Core Team Walked Out. Is This the Last Great Qwen Model?

- Advertisement -

Yesterday I was testing Qwen3.5-4B on my machine, genuinely impressed by what a 4B model was doing with images and reasoning. Then I opened X and saw a five word post from Junyang Lin, the man who built Qwen from the ground up: “bye my beloved qwen.”

That was it. No explanation, just a goodbye.

Within hours the replies were flooding in. Developers, researchers, open source contributors all asking the same thing — what just happened? And then Elon Musk’s comment on Qwen3.5 calling it “impressive intelligence density” surfaced, and Lin replied with a simple “thx elon.” People in the comments started connecting the dots — was he already gone when he replied? Did he know? Nobody is quite sure what to make of that exchange but it made the whole thing feel even stranger.

Lin wasn’t alone. Yu Bowen, who led post-training for Qwen, resigned the same day. Hui Binyuan, a core contributor focused on coding, had already left in January. Three of the most important people behind one of the best open source AI model families in the world, gone within months of each other.

I had just tested the model. I had just written about why it was worth your attention. And now the people who built it had walked out.

How Qwen Lost Its Soul

Qwen Team Lead Stepped Down

Lin Junyang wasn’t just a team lead. He had been building Qwen since 2022, turning it from an internal Alibaba project into one of the most downloaded open source model families in the world. Over 400 models released, over a billion downloads. That’s not a department head, that’s the person the whole thing was built around.

His resignation on Wednesday came two days after Qwen3.5 launched with just a five word post on X and silence after that.

Yu Bowen, who ran post-training for Qwen, left the same day. Hui Binyuan, a core contributor focused on coding, had already quietly resigned in January. Three people who understood Qwen at its deepest level, all gone within two months.

What pushed them out isn’t entirely clear. Lin himself said at a Beijing forum in January that his team was stretched thin, spending most of their resources just meeting delivery demands rather than doing the kind of research that actually moves things forward.

Alibaba CEO Eddie Wu responded with a brief statement thanking Lin and announcing a task force to coordinate future AI model development. Reading between the lines that sounds like exactly the kind of corporate restructuring that makes passionate researchers leave separate teams, separate goals, less room to just build something great.

The open source community noticed immediately. Zhipu AI’s CEO was already publicly trying to recruit the departing engineers within hours of Lin’s post.

I tested it right before everything fell apart

The timing is strange to think about. While Lin was probably writing that five word goodbye, I was running Qwen3.5-4B on my machine, genuinely surprised by what it was doing.

Vision works better than you’d expect from a 4B model. I dropped in images and it described them accurately — screenshots, diagrams, general scenes. It stumbled on location and landmark identification occasionally, giving confident answers that were just wrong. But for everyday image understanding it holds up.

Text and reasoning is where it genuinely impressed me. It thinks before it answers, works through problems rather than guessing. For something running on 16GB RAM and 6GB VRAM that’s not what you expect.

The model is good. That’s what makes this whole situation harder to sit with.

What happens to the Qwen models we already have?

The models already out there aren’t going anywhere. They’re open source, already downloaded over a billion times, and the community will keep building on them regardless of what Alibaba does next.

But that’s where the reassurance ends.

The real concern is what comes next. Qwen’s release pace existed because the people behind it genuinely cared. Those people just left. Whether Alibaba keeps the same momentum, or even keeps future models open source, nobody knows right now. A few months ago nobody expected Lin to leave either.

Use it while you can

Maybe Alibaba figures it out. Maybe the new team surprises everyone. But right now the safest thing you can do is download the Qwen3.5 weights locally and keep them. We don’t know if the next version will be this good or this open.

What Lin and his team built was rare, a full open source AI stack, genuinely competitive, freely available. That doesn’t come around often. And right now it feels like we’re watching the end of something without quite knowing what comes next.

Don’t miss any Tech Story

Subscribe To Firethering NewsLetter

You Can Unsubscribe Anytime! Read more in our privacy policy

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
Open Source AI Assistants You Can Run Locally

5 Best Open Source AI Assistants You Can Run Locally

0
Somewhere between "just use ChatGPT" and "compile this from source," there's a category of AI tools that don't get talked about enough. Apps you download once, run on your own hardware, and never pay a monthly fee to use. No data leaving your machine. No API key. No usage limits that reset on the first of the month. The tools in this list aren't compromises. Some of them have millions of downloads. One was built by Mozilla. Another turns a 1B model into a desktop companion that reacts to your coding sessions. What they share is that after the initial setup, they answer only to you. If your current AI workflow depends on a subscription staying affordable and a company deciding your use case still matters next quarter, these are worth knowing about.
apple-sues-openai-stolen-secrets

OpenAI Paid $6.5 Billion to Build an iPhone Rival. Apple Says It Was Built...

0
Last year, OpenAI acquired io, Jony Ive's hardware startup, for $6.5 billion. The deal was widely read as OpenAI's clearest signal yet that it was serious about building a physical device, something that could sit in your pocket the way an iPhone does, powered by AI agents instead of apps. A direct challenge to Apple's most important product. On Friday, Apple filed a lawsuit suggesting that challenge was built on a foundation of stolen confidential information through what Apple describes as a coordinated operation directed from the top of OpenAI's hardware division, the same division now tasked with building the device meant to compete with Apple. Apple isn't just alleging that some employees walked out with files they shouldn't have taken. It's alleging that the people now running OpenAI's hardware ambitions actively ran a system to extract Apple's most guarded technical knowledge, and that the $6.5 billion acquisition sits on top of that foundation.
Anthropic Secretly Tracked Claude Code Users. Then Called It an Experiment

Anthropic Secretly Tracked Claude Code Users. Then Called It an “Experiment.”

0
There's a version of this story where Anthropic was trying to protect itself from large-scale model theft. There's another where one of the AI industry's biggest privacy advocates quietly crossed a line its own users never expected. What makes this headline important isn't just that hidden tracking code existed. It's that the company behind it was Anthropic. Just months ago, Anthropic publicly refused to let the Trump administration use Claude to surveil American users. The company defended that position in court, arguing that AI companies shouldn't become tools for government surveillance. That stance became part of Anthropic's identity. Then came a very different decision. In March, Anthropic quietly added hidden tracking markers to Claude Code that flagged users' timezones, proxy connections, and potential ties to Chinese AI labs. The code remained unnoticed until security researcher Thereallo discovered it last week. After the discovery went public, an Anthropic engineer confirmed it on X, described it as an "experiment" intended to combat account abuse and model distillation, and said the company had already planned to remove it. The tracker was taken down shortly afterward. The bigger question isn't whether Anthropic had a reason. It's whether a company that built its reputation on privacy can afford to hide surveillance from the very developers it asks to trust its tools.