As stupid as that sounds, you are not totally wrong.

@don@lemm.ee and @kopasz7@sh.itjust.works you are misunderstanding what “observable universe” means. The observable universe is defined by the particle horizon, but the universe that can affect us in the future is defined by the event horizon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_horizon says

The particle horizon differs from the cosmic event horizon, in that the particle horizon represents the largest comoving distance from which light could have reached the observer by a specific time, while the cosmic event horizon is the largest comoving distance from which light emitted now can ever reach the observer in the future.

But even the cosmological event horizon distance is dependent on our model of the universe’s expansion, which in turn depends on the content of the universe. An event such as a vacuum collapse will drastically alter the content and the expansion rate, rendering our calculation of the event horizon invalid. So “snap changes…” may in fact be the case.

It kinda works you just gotta be careful with what you use and keep some human in the loop curating the outputs.

This meme was about training on model outputs. But would be nice if they got some trade secrets as well. Intellectual property is cancer and these IP-stealing Chinese companies, if they exist, are doing god’s work 😊 hope Indian companies steal from China next as well

You’re probably running one of the distillations then, not the full thing?

I just really hope the 2023 “I asked ChatGPT <abc> and it said <xyz>!!!” posts don’t make a comeback. They are low-effort and meaningless.

@jerryh100@lemmy.world Wrong community for this kind of post.

@BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one Can you share more details on installing it? Are you using SGLang or vLLM or something else? What kind of hardware do you have that can fit the 600B model? What is your inference tok/s?

Here’s a better media coverage of the same paper https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00030-5