4 ms·
What's really interesting to me is how easy it is to talk to it conversationally and get an appropriate response. Inspired by this post, for instance, I just no
by dslowell 4y ago
What's really interesting to me is how easy it is to talk to it conversationally and get an appropriate response. Inspired by this post, for instance, I just now tried asking it to explain the joke: "Two men walk into a bar, the third man ducks." It's initial response was nonsense:
> The joke is funny because it relies on a play on words and a surprise ending. The first two lines set up the expectation that something is going to happen to the two men who are walking into the bar, but the punchline subverts that expectation by introducing a third man who ducks, which is a unexpected and humorous twist.
I asked what wordplay was involved, and it told me this:
> The word play in the joke involves the use of the word "walk" in the first two lines and the word "duck" in the punchline. In the first two lines, "walk" is used in the literal sense, as in moving forward on foot. However, in the punchline, "duck" is used in the sense of avoiding or evading something, rather than its literal meaning of a type of bird. This sudden shift in the meaning of the word "duck" is what creates the surprise and humor in the joke.
More nonsense. But then I told it "It's actually the word "bar" that's being used in the wordplay. The word "duck" there just means evading something" and asked it to explain the joke again, and it returned this:
> In the first two lines of the joke, "walk into a bar" is used in the literal sense, as in two men entering a place where drinks are served. However, in the punchline, "bar" is used in the sense of a barrier or obstacle, rather than its literal meaning of a type of establishment. The punchline introduces a third man who "ducks" under the perceived obstacle, which is a unexpected and humorous twist. The joke also relies on the idea that walking into a bar is a common and mundane activity, so the unexpected ending adds a element of absurdity to the joke.
Though the initial response was nonsense, talking to it as if it were a human and giving it a limited hint (telling it the wordplay involved "bar" and not "duck") was enough for it to give the correct answer.
I think this is probably why so many people say they're underwhelmed. A lot of the initial responses to simplistic questions aren't so interesting. But the degree to which it is able to correctly adapt and respond to conversational input is fairly astounding.
- evandale 4y agoHow did it give the correct answer? >In the first two lines of the joke, "walk into a bar" is used in the literal sense, as in two men entering a place where drinks are served. However, in the punchline, "bar" is used in the sense of a barrier or obstacle, rather than its literal meaning of a type of establishment. The literal sense of walking into a bar isn't walking into a drinking establishment, it's walking into a actual bar. The punchline reveals the first 2 walked into a bar and the third one avoided it, no?
- technothrasher 4y agoIt was pretty close. "Literal" isn't right, "cognitively primed" would be the actual explanation. But at least it figured out the correct two different meanings of bar that were in play in the joke.
- mewpmewp2 4y agoI think the most impressive part is that it figured out that bar is something that could be an obstacle that you would have to duck. The other things like potential wordplay it can kind of try to bruteforce to see which words are most probabilistically used in order to create wordplay. If it develops connections between words like "bar" => "sometimes an obstacle" => "can be ducked", that could explain it. Like it would have all these attributes for each of those words, or concepts that relate to that word. "bar" has properties like "means multiple things", "often used in jokes", "could be an obstacle". But it must have quite a bit of properties. I'm not sure how this AI is built internally, but if it works something that has this network of words and concepts that it can have weighted connections to each other, then you could retroactively come up with how the AI could have got to that result. So user first says that they want a joke to be explained. It adds "joke" as a concept. Joke has strong network connections to something like "puns", "unexpected punchlines", "absurdity", etc. And then when a joke is presented it will try to find connections with strongest weights and least concepts travelled. Like if it's a pun joke, it will go through all the words and will see that "bar" => "multiple meanings" => "pun" => "joke". But then is it pre programmed to consider both meanings when it tries to analyse a joke that is a pun or has it somehow learned to come to it on its own?
- evandale 4y agoIt didn't figure anything out though? > But then I told it "It's actually the word "bar" that's being used in the wordplay. The word "duck" there just means evading something" and asked it to explain the joke again It gave a couple wrong answers and then was told bar is the wordplay. It didn't figure out bar has two meanings on it's own. It was also told duck is meant to mean evade and to try again. I don't agree that it came up with these associations by itself when was fed the knowledge bar has multiple meanings in the joke and duck in this context means evade.