First joke: ChatGPT seems to have failed to notice that the drinker is still drinking, despite claiming that he's quit. Second joke: I didn't get it, and not d

First joke: ChatGPT seems to have failed to notice that the drinker is still drinking, despite claiming that he's quit. Second joke: I didn't get it, and not did ChatGPT. > I apologize for misunderstanding the joke. I think that's quite an amusing experiment; but there's nothing amusing about explaining jokes. It's a bit like free online services: if you're not paying, then you're the product. In this case, if you're not laughing, you're the joke. Author then goes on to explain each joke - which must have felt a bit tedious, because ChatGPT presumably learns nothing from the explanation (or does it? I don't know how it works). Anyway, I don't think you can teach a sense of humour. Isn't having a sense of humour a bit like having curiosity? It's not exactly completely innate (although my 3yo toddler granddaughter has a wicked sense of humour). But I don't think explaining jokes to someone confers on them a sense of humour. ChatGPT seems to have some kind of built-in assumption that any joke works by "subverting expectations". So all of its first-shot explanations are based on subverted expectations, and most of it's second-shot attempts as well.