I think the issue is, that this approach will lead to limitations. And with ChatGPT it's unclear to me whether there's any party tricks going on as well. With

I think the issue is, that this approach will lead to limitations. And with ChatGPT it's unclear to me whether there's any party tricks going on as well. With jokes it could be algorithmic thing that will try to parse all of it, and it would not be a very impressive algorithm. You just bruteforce weighted connections based on inputs to find what might match the best. I don't know if it was able to recognise how pun jokes work by themselves or someone programmed it the idea of puns. Is there logic in the code that says that it should look for multiple meanings if it's a joke or was it able to do that just from training? If there's logic, then it just becomes bruteforcing when it knows that the current context is a "Joke", I should look for whether it could be a "pun" joke, or it could be a "unexpected ending" type of joke, and when I think it matches pun the best I would check all words to see which ones have double meaning. I guess better question is. If you don't tell it, that something is a joke, would it be able to realise there's something funny or a pun in something someone said, without anyone instructing it to look out for that.