Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | CamperBob2's commentslogin

The jokes I posted in this thread are new, to the best of my knowledge. Can you show that they're not?

I don't miss cassettes one bit, but I really miss marketing literature that reads like that. A masterpiece in itself.

But then...propose that we make some laws to put rules around this stuff, also known as regulations and everybody goes "whoa hold up hold up hold up...I dunno about that part."

Of course, what those who call for regulation of AI or other nascent technologies are really saying is, "Unqualified and/or biased and/or corrupt and/or dull-witted people should make decisions that affect us all, based on incomplete, misleading or rapidly-evolving information, with the power to enforce them at gunpoint."

And then they wonder why other countries beat their own.


I'm sorry...wut?

This interaction nicely illustrates why so many Americans sound hopeless when talking about these developments. We can't even get our fellow citizens to do anything about the school shootings, our incredibly expensive healthcare, the homelessness crisis, or really anything else. Instead we are surrounded by conservative reactionaries who view "let's stop dumping cyanide into the town pond" as a communist plot to steal their religion.

So yeah, when people around here look at "AI" and all the harm it's already doing, they don't any hope that regulations will be put in place before more harm is done.


The person comparing a building full of computers to dumping cyanide in the town pond is the reactionary in this conversation.

I mean, it's pretty clear how it plays out, if you look at the EU. Those who want the US to work that way need to be fought, and fought hard.

No, you'll just say "That's not really very funny," or "That's not very impressive poetry," and nobody will be able to dispute it.

For some time now, at least a year, LLMs have been capable of doing both of these things well enough to fool you.

(Pastebin of my response below, which got nuked for whatever reason: https://pastebin.com/buJBSgiq . Some if not most of them would've fooled me into thinking a human wrote them.)


Okay post a really funny LLM joke about potatoes and post a great piece of LLM poetry about lemons.

I’ll wait. You should be able to do it quickly though since LLMs are so good at it.


CamperBob2 responded with a model comparison of potato jokes and got insta-[dead]'d by an auto filter.

Maybe turn on [show dead] option and / or vouch.


> responded

And the results are just awful.


Hell yeah, no argument there

- but in this case I wouldn't advocate for [dead]ing a mostly AI response as it was exactly what was asked for and it compares AI models when asked for potato based dad jokes.


Of course they're awful, they're jokes about potatoes and poems about lemons.

The question is, can you tell that a machine wrote all of them? If so, how?


Nope I guess can't tell between machine written and mediocre jokes.

Models are structurally biased toward the expected, which is the opposite of what makes a joke land or a poem transcend.


I think you could make that case for poetry but I'm not sure about jokes. Great poems tell us something new or make us feel something new, which is hard to do when the subject is lemons, while jokes work by wedging the familiar into new contexts.

That's why the jokes work somewhat better than the poems here. I genuinely laughed at "Are those chips?" Which came from the model running on my own freakin' GPU.


Do funny jokes about potatoes or great poetry about lemons exist? If not, can they exist? How do you know?

Gemini 3.1 Pro:

    Potatoes are easily the most intimidating 
    audience for a stand-up comedian. They have 
    dozens of eyes to judge you with, they are 
    almost always baked by the time you get on stage, 
    and if your set really starts to bomb, they are 
    the only ones in the room who are actually looking 
    forward to a roasting!
GPT 5.4:

    Potatoes are the only food we traumatize into greatness.
Qwen 3.5 122B-A10B, running locally on my graphics card:

    (Steps up to the mic, adjusts the stand, 
    and looks around the room)

    Alright everyone, settle down. You know, 
    I've been thinking a lot lately... mostly 
    about my dating life. Or rather, my lack of it.

    See, my last relationship was with a potato.

    And honestly? It was amazing at first. We had 
    so much in common. She was grounded, she loved being 
    buried deep under the covers, and we were perfect 
    together until the heat came on. But then... well, 
    let's just say she started to get a little couchy.

    (Pauses for effect)

    No, wait, that's not it. The real problem was that she 
    had some really deep-seated issues. Literally! She was 
    covered in eyes. Every time we tried to have an intimate 
    conversation, she'd just stare at me with a dozen 
    different expressions. It was weirdly intense. Like, "I 
    see you," "You're suspicious," "Wait, are those chips?"

    Anyway, thanks guys! You've been a great crowd. You're 
    like potatoes to me... you're all baked tonight! 
GPT 5.4:

    Not every light is gentle.
    Some light shines with sharpened edge.

    A lemon keeps the memory of sun
    but teaches it into bitterness,
    as if to say:
    what wakes the mouth
    may also wake the soul.

    We do not ripen only into sweetness.
    Sometimes the truest gold
    is tart.
Opus 4.6:

    A lemon on the table
    is already an argument—
    that yellow can be sour,
    that beauty owes you nothing.
    Peel it and the room
    takes sides.

    The rind remembers being whole.
    The flesh forgives too quickly.
    What's left is yours:
    a stain on wood,
    a sting in the hangnail
    you forgot you had.
Qwen 3.5 122B-A10B:

    To cut it is to break a seal,
    Where bitterness and sweetness dwell.
    A sudden bite, both stinging, sweet—
    The taste of earth beneath our feet.

    No sugar softens all its sting,
    It forces soul to wake and sing.
    A small, fierce orb, yellow as dawn,
    Teaching the tongue how life is born.
Your turn. Go round up some English-lit grad students and give them the same prompts. I can't do any better, myself, but maybe they can.

I don't consider AI to threaten "damage to society" the way you seem to, but I did find it interesting to think about how ridiculously well-produced the video was, and what that might signify in the future.

I kept squinting and scrutinizing it, looking for signs that it was rendered by a video model. Loss of coherence in long shots with continuity flaws between them, unrealistic renderings of obscure objects and hardware, inconsistent textures for skin and clothing, that sort of thing... nope, it was all real, just the result of a lot of hard work and attention to detail.

Trouble is, this degree of perfection is itself unrealistic and distracting in a Goodhart's Law sense. Musicians complain when a drum track is too-perfectly quantized, or when vocals and instruments always stay in tune to within a fraction of a hertz, and I do have to wonder if that's a hazard here. I guess that's where you're coming from? If you wanted to train an AI model to create this type of content, this is exactly what you would want to use as source material. And at that point, success means all that effort is duplicated (or rather simulated) effortlessly.

So will that discourage the next-generation of LaurieWireds from even trying? Or are we going to see content creators deliberately back away from perfect production values, in order to appear more authentic?


Because no one has come up with anything better. We're all ears, got any original suggestions?

Maybe being unable to believe that anything better than capitalism is possible is part of the problem.

Talk is cheap in any economic system, and no one will shoot you for proposing new ones... at least under capitalism. Let's hear what you've got.

Why is it my responsibility or anyone else's to do your thinking for you?

I've seen more than enough of your political comments to know you aren't arguing in good faith here. You aren't interested in a discussion, you're interested in an argument. You consider capitalism to be the only moral, just and valid system by definition, and you consider any possible faults with capitalism to be the result of not doing capitalism hard enough.

When you can view politics and economics in something other than religious terms then maybe we can talk honestly about capitalism and its alternatives. Otherwise, I mean, all you intend to bring to the table is "free market good, leftists bad" and I've already met a million of you here.


Understood. Maybe some other time, then.

If you have something that emits a lot of alpha particles as it decays, you could surround it with a source of electrons, I suppose. The details would have to be left as an exercise, and I doubt you'd get enough helium to be very useful unless you were dealing with large amounts of ridiculously-radioactive substances.

Same with fusion. Due to the implications of E=mc^2, fusion yields a lot of energy and a uselessly-small amount of matter. There don't seem to be many good ways to get a lot of helium besides either waiting millions of years for it to show up naturally, or carefully recycling what we already have.


> you could surround it with a source of electrons, I suppose

Water would be the best for this. The cross-section is good and water can ionise easily. But yeah, you would not get a lot of it.


Hence the origin of the name!

That comes later.

They are idiots with nuclear weapons and a complete lock on all three branches of government.

They are also immune to embarrassment.


>They are also immune to embarrassment.

No, they, especially one of them has EXTREME anxiety about his image, just not in the way that normal people do. He's got the psychology of an anxious child wanting to please a neglectful father. This is why TACO. And why every third word is some ridiculous boast about something nonsensical. This is insecurity driven politics and its WHY HE GOT ELECTED. Fear and insecurity electing what they imagine strength to be.

What would the stupidest, most insecure, adult child think is the pinnacle of strength? ... yup.

And the attention economy is being set up to exploit this demographic because it's the lowest common denominator and it WORKS.

Evolutionarily it's some kind of mechanism to weed out the weaknesses in a population by exaggerating them so it's easier for natural selection to weed them out? Or punishing the rest of us for not doing enough about it before it got so bad... something like that.


Trump is susceptible to narcissistic injury, but I don't know if you could call it 'embarrassment.' The latter implies some sense of regret or shame, and he appears incapable of either. You might as well expect Alex Honnold to exhibit a fear of heights.

Since whatever happens to Trump is always somebody else's fault, why should embarrassment come into the picture? They're the ones who should be embarrassed! And so on.

Trump's followers are also utterly shameless, and they're the ones that matter since they vote in such large numbers. Just like their leader, if they could be embarrassed, they would be, but they're not.


I think we're confusing outward display of "shame" and "embarrassment" or whatever else in that general genre and inner experience. These people are DRIVEN by the internal experience and anxiety about fear, embarrassment, shame, inadequacy, etc. and it explains all of their actions very well.

They're blustery cowards. This is how that kind of person acts.

They're not shameless, they're overflowing with shame and acting out because of it. Leaders and supporters.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: