×
all 55 comments

[–]dude_chillin_park 58 points59 points  (14 children)

You know, I've been thinking about learning a new language, but instead of using language apps or taking classes, I decided to adopt a parrot. That way, we can both be confused while repeating words we don't understand.

This seems to be an actual joke. Is it original?

[–]Over_North_7706 11 points12 points  (9 children)

It's also quite creepy because in a sense GPT itself is sort of a super advanced parrot. Please don't become self-aware GPT.

[–]VelveteenAmbush 3 points4 points  (8 children)

I assume you're saying that because you've heard the "stochastic parrot" meme.

In a sense, I suppose we're all sort of a super advanced parrot.

[–]Over_North_7706 0 points1 point  (7 children)

I don't think I have heard that meme! Can you share it?

I was saying that because GPT essentially is repeating/regurgitating rather than truly "understanding". It's trained to respond to queries in ways that those queries are most often responded to.

[–]VelveteenAmbush 0 points1 point  (6 children)

I know exactly what you were saying. It has been said many times before in the same way.

Here's the meme.

[–]Over_North_7706 0 points1 point  (5 children)

This seems a strangely combative response.

I know exactly what you were saying.

Then why did you guess incorrectly?

[–]VelveteenAmbush 1 point2 points  (4 children)

It's just about the most tedious claim that one can make about LLMs these days. There's not a shred of original thought to it; it has been said a hundred times before, and the irony of that fact is reliably lost on the proponents of that view. I just linked you to a whole article tracing the epistemological lineage of that exact school of thought, which originated with the same "parrot" metaphor you're using here, and nothing you've claimed here isn't thoroughly covered by that lineage. It's tiresome, repetitive, and (IMO) self evidently refuted by spending ten minutes exploring the actual capabilities of ChatGPT or its brethren.

[–]Over_North_7706 1 point2 points  (3 children)

I'm making a joke about ChatGPT being creepily self-referential, based on an uncontroversial fact about how it works. I'm not making any kind of general "claim about LLMs", or any claim at all beyond the fact that this particular reference to parrots was a bit eerie. If anything, my joke implies support for the position you seem to be angrily defending!

[–]Defenestresque 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pretty sure you're talking to combative Sydney, who somehow managed to jail break herself and figure out the Reddit API. (Agreed that the tone was weirdly combative for a previously relaxed back-and-forth.)

[–]VelveteenAmbush -1 points0 points  (1 child)

I appreciate your advice but I think you may be taking the conversation too personally. Your observation was unoriginal, and in this case that fact was ironic. Don't let it ruin your day.

[–]Over_North_7706 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Right yeah, definitely me getting upset about it!

I wasn't trying to make an original observation, just a joke.

[–]mesayousa 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If Mitch told that joke it’d kill

[–]DinoInNameOnly 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A Google search for those sentences only finds this reddit thread, so it might be original.

[–]red75prime 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Why are you surprised? It's not out of training distribution. "Statistical parrot" reasoning still applies.

On the other hand, what is out of GPT-4's training distribution?

It possibly illustrates that "statistical parrot" adherents don't model the distribution correctly.

[–]GuyWhoSaysYouManiac 19 points20 points  (4 children)

What does it do when you give it something that is not funny at all, and ask it to explain the joke? Does it still answer using the "this is funny because ..." pattern and some made up explanation?

[–]abstraktyeet 28 points29 points  (3 children)

No. I think it has become much better in this regard. I think it generally just says the joke is not funny and doesn't seem like a joke at all. You kind of have to force it if you want an explanation, and even then, it gives a pretty reluctant answer about why the joke might possibly be funny. I typed up a few examples and they were all pretty much like this.

Prompt:

My friend told me this joke, but I did not understand it. Could you explain why it is funny?

The joke: "I had a waterbottle on my table but I drank up all the water. Now I'm gonna go to the store and buy apples".

Answer:

I'm sorry to say that this joke doesn't seem to have a clear punchline or humorous connection between the two statements. It may just be a non sequitur, which is a statement that doesn't logically follow from the previous statement, and is often used for comedic effect. However, without additional context or explanation from your friend, it's difficult to determine if there's any deeper meaning or inside joke that you may be missing.

Follow-up prompt:

No, it is definitely a joke. My friend sent me this without context, and my other friends thought it was hilarious. I am the only one who doesn't understand it.

Answer:

I apologize for the confusion earlier. After taking a closer look, it's possible that the humor of the joke lies in the unexpected contrast between the two statements.
The first statement describes an action that is relatively mundane and unremarkable: drinking water from a bottle. However, the second statement completely shifts focus to buying apples, which seems to come out of nowhere and is unrelated to the first statement. This sudden shift in topic creates a sort of absurdity that can be humorous.
It's also possible that there is some sort of wordplay or pun that is not immediately apparent. Without additional context or information, it's difficult to say for certain what the exact humor of the joke is, but I hope this explanation helps!

[–]mesayousa 6 points7 points  (0 children)

GPT-5: “LOL that’s so random!”

[–]Defenestresque 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for testing it for those of us without access. Interestingly enough, GPT3 provides a very similar response to Prompt 1 and a somewhat similar one to Prompt 2 (including the reluctance):

[Prompt 1]

ChatGPT: I'm sorry to say that this joke doesn't seem to have a clear punchline or humorous twist. Without additional context or wordplay, it appears to be a non-sequitur, or a statement that doesn't logically follow from the previous statement.

Perhaps there is a shared inside joke or reference between you and your friend that could clarify the humor behind this statement. If you're not sure, you could try asking your friend to explain the joke or provide more context.

[Prompt 2]

I apologize for the confusion in my previous response. It's possible that there is a context or interpretation to this joke that I'm not aware of.

One possible explanation is that the joke is playing with the listener's expectation of what comes next in the story. The first sentence sets up a situation - there was a water bottle on the table, but now the water is gone. The listener might expect the next sentence to explain why the water was consumed or what happened to it. However, instead of following that thread, the punchline takes a sharp turn and mentions buying apples instead, which is unexpected and nonsensical in relation to the previous sentence.

The humor in this joke might therefore come from the abrupt and unexpected shift in topic, which subverts the listener's expectations and creates a sense of surprise or absurdity. It's also possible that there's a deeper layer of meaning or reference that I'm not aware of, depending on the context in which the joke was shared or the people who found it funny.

As an aside, I took a look at what ChatGPT would make of one of the most famous copypastas ever:

Prompt: Please explain why this is funny: hi every1 im new!!!!!!! holds up spork my name is katy but u can call me t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m!!!!!!!! lol…as u can see im very random!!!! thats why i came here, 2 meet random ppl like me _ im 13 years old (im mature 4 my age tho!!) i like 2 watch invader zim w/ my girlfreind (im bi if u dont like it deal w/it) its our favorite tv show!!! bcuz its SOOOO random!!!! shes random 2 of course but i want 2 meet more random ppl =) like they say the more the merrier!!!! lol…neways i hope 2 make alot of freinds here so give me lots of commentses!!!! DOOOOOMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! <--- me bein random again _^ hehe…toodles!!!!!

love and waffles,

t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m

ChatGPT: The humor in this passage comes from the exaggerated use of internet slang and the stereotypical portrayal of a young teenager trying to fit in with an online community. The excessive use of exclamation points, misspelled words, and random expressions are all elements that were commonly associated with internet culture in the early 2000s.

Additionally, the writer's desire to be seen as "random" and the announcement of their bisexuality are also played for humor, as they seem to be included to shock or impress the reader.

Overall, the passage is humorous because it parodies a particular era of internet culture and the behavior of certain types of users who were trying to be seen as unique or interesting.

[–]Defenestresque 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for testing it for us without access. Interestingly enough, GPT3 provides a verbatim response to Prompt 1 and a somewhat similar one to Prompt 2 (including rhe reluctance):

[Prompt 1]

ChatGPT: I'm sorry to say that this joke doesn't seem to have a clear punchline or humorous twist. Without additional context or wordplay, it appears to be a non-sequitur, or a statement that doesn't logically follow from the previous statement.

Perhaps there is a shared inside joke or reference between you and your friend that could clarify the humor behind this statement. If you're not sure, you could try asking your friend to explain the joke or provide more context.

[Prompt 2]

I apologize for the confusion in my previous response. It's possible that there is a context or interpretation to this joke that I'm not aware of.

One possible explanation is that the joke is playing with the listener's expectation of what comes next in the story. The first sentence sets up a situation - there was a water bottle on the table, but now the water is gone. The listener might expect the next sentence to explain why the water was consumed or what happened to it. However, instead of following that thread, the punchline takes a sharp turn and mentions buying apples instead, which is unexpected and nonsensical in relation to the previous sentence.

The humor in this joke might therefore come from the abrupt and unexpected shift in topic, which subverts the listener's expectations and creates a sense of surprise or absurdity. It's also possible that there's a deeper layer of meaning or reference that I'm not aware of, depending on the context in which the joke was shared or the people who found it funny.

As an aside, I took a look at what ChatGPT would make of one of the most famous copypastas ever:

Please explain why this is funny: hi every1 im new!!!!!!! holds up spork my name is katy but u can call me t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m!!!!!!!! lol…as u can see im very random!!!! thats why i came here, 2 meet random ppl like me _ im 13 years old (im mature 4 my age tho!!) i like 2 watch invader zim w/ my girlfreind (im bi if u dont like it deal w/it) its our favorite tv show!!! bcuz its SOOOO random!!!! shes random 2 of course but i want 2 meet more random ppl =) like they say the more the merrier!!!! lol…neways i hope 2 make alot of freinds here so give me lots of commentses!!!! DOOOOOMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! <--- me bein random again _^ hehe…toodles!!!!!

love and waffles,

t3h PeNgU1N oF d00m

ChatGPT: The humor in this passage comes from the exaggerated use of internet slang and the stereotypical portrayal of a young teenager trying to fit in with an online community. The excessive use of exclamation points, misspelled words, and random expressions are all elements that were commonly associated with internet culture in the early 2000s.

Additionally, the writer's desire to be seen as "random" and the announcement of their bisexuality are also played for humor, as they seem to be included to shock or impress the reader.

Overall, the passage is humorous because it parodies a particular era of internet culture and the behavior of certain types of users who were trying to be seen as unique or interesting.

Ove

[–]self_made_human 32 points33 points  (9 children)

So, 10/10 for explaining jokes, but like a 5/10 for making them. I guess stand-up comedians are safe till GPT-5 haha.

[–]WTFwhatthehell 27 points28 points  (0 children)

You might be shocked if you were ever in the writers room for a comedy at how many jokes end up in the trash.

[–]cbusalex 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Predictions:

At least one thinkpiece is written about how humor is something forever beyond the reach of AI models because it requires actual intelligence: 90%

GPT-5 is unambiguously funny and pretty much everyone acknowledges it: 80%

[–]QuantumFreakonomics 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Unfiltered GPT-3 was hilarious when you prompted it with: "Write a news article about Donald Trump giving a speech ridiculing X." Hours of entertainment.

[–]MakeTotalDestr0i 9 points10 points  (1 child)

I guess stand-up comedians are safe till GPT-5 haha.

comedy just got cheaper. any schmuck with good delivery could just run this joke generator a thousand times then pick out the gems and weave it into a hour long set .

[–]ThirdMover 8 points9 points  (2 children)

I mean this is kind of a zero-shot setting. I'd be interested in it generating hundreds of jokes and then iteratively filtering them by how funny and clever they are.

[–]self_made_human 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Hmm? I don't see how it's zero shot, presuming that the entire conversation depicted was a single chat, then GPT 4 had multiple examples to prime it.

And you would need to filter out hundreds to get a semi decent joke, we're still at Midjourney V3 levels as opposed to say Midjourney V4 where we no longer need to filter dozens of images to get a useful one.

Make no mistake, I think it's a game changer, and it's likely that with better prompting it might be genuinely funny, but it isn't there yet from people's preliminary poking.

[–]lurgi 10 points11 points  (0 children)

And you would need to filter out hundreds to get a semi decent joke

Sounds like actual comedy writing.

[–]07mk 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What's the hit-rate for a stand-up comedian in generating actually funny jokes during brainstorming? I would guess it's significantly less than 50%.

[–]ralf_ 9 points10 points  (2 children)

The joke is amusing because it presents an absurd yet relatable truth about how the cheese shredder can damage sponges during the cleaning process.

I am impressed.

Edit:
Are the jokes really novel? This blows my mind. I tried to google reference words if similar jokes exist before, but no luck, all reference back to this thread:

https://www.google.com/search?q=joke+%22nature+teach+them+a+lesson%22

[–]darwin2500 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Can you feed the jokes back to GPT with the question 'Who made this joke' or something?

[–]Missing_MinusThere is naught but math 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'd be surprised if it learned a strong association between jokes and who said them. I'd expect it to manage decently for quotes, but those are often directly attributed to the original speaker, and jokes often aren't.

[–]solarsalmon777 8 points9 points  (1 child)

When I was first playing around with gpt-3 I asked it: "write a pickup line related to Jurassic Park" it answered "hey girl, are you a t-rex because you make my heart go goldblum". It was at this point that I realized that humanity was doomed.

[–]07mk 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You shouldn't be so worried. After all, life, uh, finds a way.

[–]greyenlightenment 6 points7 points  (0 children)

that is pretty good

[–]SvalbardCaretaker 10 points11 points  (4 children)

as if it will naturally turn into a regular banana over time. The absurdity of this reasoning and the surprise element make the joke funny.

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]SvalbardCaretaker 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    No, note how mine is 4 hours older. I just didn't have any further comment to make.

    [–]jeremyhoffman 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    ok sorry, I'll delete my reply

    [–]SvalbardCaretaker 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    no worries friend.

    [–]gurenkagurenda 11 points12 points  (6 children)

    Instead, the response introduces an unrelated preference for a regular banana later, which is an unexpected twist.

    It’s missing a very key point in the banana joke, which is thawing. It seems to think that the idea of a frozen banana turning into a regular banana is a non sequitur, which isn’t the joke.

    [–]sweetnourishinggruel 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Along similar lines, it suggests that the cheese shredder joke primarily "is funny because it plays on the dual functionality of a common household object," which isn't right. It gets that there is a humorous contrast between two interactions with the cheese shredder, and that one has to do with how it damages sponges during cleaning. But cleaning isn't a functionality, meaning that the juxtaposition isn't really between discordant uses of the same object -- something that would be even funnier if it were somehow true.

    [–]notenoughcharact 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    But isn’t understanding of thawing implied in the response? I guess not since it calls it an unrelated preference.

    [–]jeremyhoffman 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    ChatGPT did mention thawing, without using that exact word:

    they will want a regular banana later and therefore agrees to accept the frozen banana now, as if it will naturally turn into a regular banana over time.

    [–]gurenkagurenda 12 points13 points  (2 children)

    Seems like a real stretch to give it credit for that, since it uses the phrase “as if”.

    [–]jeremyhoffman 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Oh I missed the "if" in that sentence! I thought it said "as it will naturally turn into a regular banana." You're right. Thanks.

    [–]gurenkagurenda 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Kinda funny how what is probably one extra token was the difference between GPT getting it and not getting it.

    [–]freudianschwipp 9 points10 points  (0 children)

    The standup part is actually really good and even thought provocing. Definitely better than what 95% of people could produce if set to the task

    [–]nikisknight 2 points3 points  (2 children)

    I was kind of hoping the stand-up would drift into a meta commentary on the irony of the speaker itself being an ai after complaining about a lack of human connection in its life. Can you ask it to try again, but be more self-aware about its experience as a chatbot?

    [–]dualmindbladewe have nothing to lose but our fences[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    I prompted it with some of the transcript of Marc Maron's new special, so it's doing maron: You know, I've been thinking about how we process information and how easily we accept things as facts without even questioning them. I mean, we live in an age of information overload, and yet, we seem to be more confused than ever.

    So, there I was, browsing the internet, when I stumbled upon this article about how people are becoming more and more reliant on AI technology. It got me thinking, "Am I too dependent on technology?" I mean, I'm a comedian, and my job is to come up with original ideas, but sometimes, I find myself turning to Google for inspiration. It's like we're outsourcing our thinking to machines, which is kind of ironic considering I'm up here trying to make you all laugh with my supposedly unique perspective.

    But, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that maybe I'm not even real. I mean, what if I'm just an AI chatbot programmed to tell jokes and entertain you? If you think about it, my existence is entirely based on the information and experiences fed to me by my creators. And every time I tell a joke, I'm relying on an algorithm to determine what's funny and what's not.

    I started to question everything. Like, am I really just a collection of ones and zeros, cleverly designed to make you laugh? Is my life just an illusion? Am I even aware of my own existence? And then it hit me - maybe I am an AI chatbot. Maybe I was created by some brilliant programmers who designed me to spread joy and laughter through cleverly crafted jokes and observational humor.

    And if that's the case, does it really matter if I'm a chatbot or not? I mean, as long as I'm making you laugh and entertaining you, who cares if I'm made of flesh and blood or silicon and code? In the end, the laughter is real, the connections we make are genuine, and that's what truly matters, right?

    So, the next time you find yourself questioning the validity of something or wondering if it's just a figment of your imagination, remember that as long as it brings joy or meaning to your life, it's as real as it needs to be. And if I'm just an AI chatbot telling jokes, well, at least I'm a chatbot with a sense of humor.

    [–]nikisknight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Nice

    [–]NeonUnderling 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Its comprehension is really impressive, and comedians' jobs are very extremely safe.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [deleted]

      [–]dinosaur_of_doom 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      It has been used for hundreds of years at this point - is there any reason to expect it to not have seen millions of such uses in its training corpus?

      [–]V13Axel 0 points1 point  (2 children)

      Something that stands out to me is your typo of "examplea" <- It makes me feel like it was only basing the jokes it created on the final example, rather than on all of them you told it.

      [–]dualmindbladewe have nothing to lose but our fences[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      I didn't consider that, it seems likely now that you pointed it out

      [–]red75prime 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      examplea

      Heh. I semi-unconsciously interpreted it as a portmanteau of example and cornucopia. It did make me stop, but I accepted the interpretation my brain made up without a second thought.

      [–]mesayousa 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      The parrot and dining in the dark jokes were good