Hi there,
First of all, thank you so much for taking the time to share such a thorough, passionate, and detailed piece of feedback.
As the team managing the Developer Platform and the underlying inference infrastructure, we are deeply flattered by your incredibly high praise for the model’s capabilities. You give us too much credit, but it means the world to hear that it is helping you tackle multiple projects. Please know that our Pre-training and RL teams are continuously striving to refine and push the limits of the models, while we on the platform side are doing everything we can to ensure they run as efficiently as possible for developers like you.
That being said, reading about your experience with the workflow interruptions and the quota design is genuinely tough. We completely understand your frustration when you are “in the zone” and suddenly hit an unexpected wall.
To help get this sorted, it is important to share a bit of context on how things are structured under the hood:
Kimi Code operates as a core part of the broader Membership ecosystem. Its product logic, code plans, and quota systems (like the weekly vs. monthly allocation you mentioned) are designed and managed independently from our Developer Platform’s pay-as-you-go API infrastructure.
We absolutely welcome and value these kinds of deep-dive discussions here on the forum! Your breakdown of the math and the product design is incredibly insightful, and it is exactly the kind of user perspective that drives better products. However, to truly influence how the membership tiers and quotas are structured moving forward, we highly encourage you to forward this exact post directly to [email protected].
Putting your feedback directly in front of the product and membership teams is the best way to advocate for a more reasonable quota system that matches the power of the engine you enjoy using.
Thank you again for pushing the model to its limits, and for caring enough to help us all build a better ecosystem. Keep the feedback coming!