Login

u/TomHale

Very disappointed with free MiMo Pro 2.5: usage limits terrible, intelligence sub GLM 5.1
▲ 3 r/LLM

Very disappointed with free MiMo Pro 2.5: usage limits terrible, intelligence sub GLM 5.1

I was lucky enough to get a month's free Pro plan[1] and set it up yesterday.

Findings:

  • The initial setup in OpenCode was tedious. There are 3 different provider URLs, and the documentation doesn't say which environment $var name to use. About 30 minutes wasted.

  • The model ignores what I've said. It will do one of the two things that I mention. I need to be super explicit like I'm talking to someone who needs it spelled out in a todo list. Not the kind of smarts that I was expecting.

  • It's once got into a thinking loop. I've also seen it printing some garbage when thinking about how to call tools. Early days yet, but still worth reporting.

  • The usage limits are CRAP

I just checked and I've got Used 77.0% and 540,078,942 / 700,000,000. Normally I'd use about 60M tokens in a day.

Most of that was burned by it trying to work out how to setup some zinit zsh plugins. It went in circles a lot.

My usage was mostly interactive-ish -- no "go implement these 97 tests" kind of stuff. And that's after only about a day of solid usage.

My "solid usage" definition: running about 5 OpenCode sessions simultaneously.

I've read that there are token caching issues -- this easily explains my ridiculous token usage.

Yeah, I could have used the non-Pro version, but since the Pro version was so painfully stupid, I had no desire to.

Bottom line

  • Usage limits are currently crap
  • I rate it as: Deepseek V4 Pro > Kimi K2.6 > GLM 5.1 > MiMo Pro 2.5

Dear Xiaomi, you've got a reputation emergency

  • The common word on the street is that your cache is broken
  • Please give ALL your non-free people a free month -- you owe it to them given your broken cache
  • Hell, give them a free month of UPGRADE -- your infra can obviously handle the current, non-caching load, get people used to using more, and they'll likely keep the upgrade in the future :)

I'm willing to do an honest re-review. Please consider giving Open Source maintainers an ongoing, and Max subscription, like Claude do.

Re the 100T token give away

Sadly it's not been successful. Only <10% are currently given away. I was very surprised given the open source credentials that I presented to be given such a hobbled plan to try out.

The one month of Pro that gets used up in about 1.5 days isn't really a great "gift" of tokens. Feel free to DM.

[1] https://100t.xiaomimimo.com/

u/TomHale — 12 hours ago
▲ 0 r/vaultwarden

bitwarden AND vaultwarden

I'd like to run both.

Always accessible via enterprise grade housing.

My own backup just in case.

How?

reddit.com
u/TomHale — 1 day ago
▲ 7 r/Qwen_AI

Good-ish unlimited Qwen 3.6 Max for $5.5 / week - dialagram.me

For Science, I risked $5.5 on the "Dialagram Ultra Pass".

For the money, it's pretty damn good value.

Cons:

  • It's certainly not the fastest
  • No obvious ToS, privacy or training policies
    • Assume the worst for safety until they're provided

Pros:

  • No hourly, weekly or monthly caps.

Unknown:

  • Quantisation

Can someone help me:

  • How to do a tokens per second test?
  • How to do a TTFT test?

Models:

qwen-3.5-plus
qwen-3.5-plus-thinking
qwen-3.6-plus
qwen-3.6-plus-thinking
qwen-3.6-max-preview
qwen-3.6-max-preview-thinking
qwen-3.5-omni-plus
reddit.com
u/TomHale — 9 days ago
▲ 0 r/LLMDevs

Unlimited Qwen 3.6 Max for $5.5 / week - dialagram.me

I've not tried this out (yet), but the deal seems insanely good for a one-trick-pony.

No hourly caps either (the FAQ entry doesn't say that explicitly, but the site does).

FAQs:

Is Nexum Router really unlimited?

Yes. You get unlimited access to Qwen 3.6 Max Preview with no message limits, session caps, or weekly usage caps.

What model do I get access to?

You get full access to Qwen 3.6 Max Preview for coding, writing, analysis, brainstorming, and day-to-day AI work.

reddit.com
u/TomHale — 10 days ago
▲ 1 r/OpenAI

TL;DR:

The non-existing PR "template" is a muddled circular reference of two documents, and the best you can get out of reading them is:

  • What? Why? How?
  • replace this text with a detailed and high quality description of your changes

This is almost as useful as saying "make it good".

OpenAI's Codex CLI repo (openai/codex) takes a firm stance on external contributions: "by invitation only." From their contributing guide:

> "Pull requests that have not been explicitly invited by a member of the Codex team will be closed without review."

Fair enough — they explain why: reviewing unsolicited PRs took more time than implementing fixes directly, and many lacked context on architectural constraints or roadmap priorities.

But if you are invited to submit a PR, the PR template and contributing guide form a circular reference:

  1. The PR template says: "Please read the dedicated 'Contributing' markdown file for details"
  2. The contributing guide says: *"Fill in the PR template (or include similar information) — What? Why? How?"*

There are no "What? Why? How?" sections in the template. It just says "replace this text with a detailed and high quality description of your changes."

  • I filed issue #19856 pointing this out. A maintainer updated the PR template wording slightly and closed it.

  • I filed issue #20038 noting the circular reference was still intact — the "What? Why? How?" structure still doesn't exist anywhere, and contributing.md still doesn't link to a template. That issue was also closed (as "not planned").

What a good template would look like: Most well-run open-source repos provide structured PR templates with explicit sections — "Summary," "Test plan," "Related issues" — instead of a single "replace this text" blank. For a repo that already limits who can contribute for quality purposes, making those instructions clear and non-circular seems like a low-effort, high-impact fix.

u/TomHale — 23 days ago