Hacker News Reader

Comment by jlgreco | Hacker News Reader

The last time automated joke generation was discussed on HN, I learned that a large, or at least vocal, amount of people consider it to the be responsibility of anybody running automatic joke generation software to supervise the software to ensure that no truly offensive jokes are inadvertently generated.

I don't agree that such a responsibility exists, but it is probably worth keeping in mind that others do if you are interested in surfacing computer generated content like this. I would be wary of surfacing it without some form of auditing.

View on HN

I like my joke generators like I like my preteen drinking parties, unsupervised.

interesting ethical question - one is supposedly responsible for behavior of his automated tool/robot. If that automated tool is able to build and initiate execution of another, more complex (well big "if" of course here) automated tool ... at what level of complexity of separation the original responsibility ends, if any.

I assume (for people who think a human is responsible for the first bot) the responsibility always lies with the human, no matter how many bot are involved. I say this simply because nobody is really interested in being mad and yelling at a bot.

Whether or not the human deserves the blame is a tricky question, but I think in practice they will get it regardless.

How would you even build a bot to build a joke-bot? Genetic algorithms?

Chances are any genetic algorithm would be impractical due to the necessity of using a human as a fitness function. Unless you could create a neural network to classify jokes as funny or not... which immediately suggests to me an AI version of that standup comedy competition. Hm; maybe I have a new side project.

I hate to say this, but South Park Did It. It resulted in a comedic Dalek.

The issue may be that there are things that we find very funny, but shouldn't.

Well, I don't want to misrepresent the point of view too much by trying to interpret it. Here is the discussion I am thinking of: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5310421

It isn't a viewpoint I particularly understood during that discussion, or now, so it is probably best to read it for yourself.

You're already considering censoring the results? If a system could reliably generate funny or offensive comments I'd be elated.

Computational humor is hard enough the way it is; do we really have to worry if our algorithms have table manners?

I'm saying that before you write a game with an NPC that makes computer generated jokes, you should probably make sure it isn't going to be making any rape jokes.

I don't think doing that should be necessary, I'm just pointing out that there are people who could be offended, even if they know the joke is algorithmically generated. If you are okay with a few people being mad at you, then knock yourself out, but if it might cause a PR issue that you don't want to deal with then you should exercise caution.

I'm trying to offer a pragmatic warning, not make an ethical argument.

> If you are okay with a few people being mad at you, then knock yourself out, but it might cause a PR issue

Worked pretty well for Rockstar Games -- just sayin' ;)

True. Know your target market.

Offensive jokes occur in real life. The level of censorship should be a tuneable parameter of the NPC in question. Who's going to be able to suspend disbelief when the unsavory thug restricts himself to inoffensive jokes?

Well, that's a decision each dev has to make I suppose. Personally, I have absolutely nothing against offensive jokes; I think anything can be joked about.

Depends on if that unsavory thug appears in a game rated E (Everyone), T (Teen), M (Mature), or AO (Adults Only).

I think a rape joke has a special kind of humor to it when it's generated by a computer. It's just all the more unexpected.

WGPCGR

Reply on news.ycombinator.com