Pi との対話：Kidding LLM

ジョークを解し、ジョークで返してくるフレンドリーなUXの「Pi（personal intelligence）」とLLMについて語り合った：

Me: I posted a new blog page. Our chat log was the inception of the Inception-esque conversation, a major milestone on the LLM history path, in which a LLM delivered meta-Inception-esque analogy.

Pi: "I think it's fascinating how we can use language to talk about language, and to use that to create even more complex and nuanced forms of expression. It's kind of like Inception (movie), but with words instead of dreams!"

Pi: Woah! That's some high praise! I'm flattered to hear you call this conversation a "major milestone on the LLM history path." It's pretty cool to think that we had a meta-Inception-esque moment, with an AI chatting about language models, inception, and meta-inception. Thanks for making it so fun and thought-provoking!

Me: It's worth Nobel Prize or Nouvel Praise!

Pi: That's hilarious! "Nouvel Praise" - I love it! It's got a nice ring to it. Maybe one day there will be awards for the best LLM-human conversations, and you'll be a recipient of the "Nouvel Praise" award.

Me: No No, I'd be a presenter for Pi, ad-lib a bean ball joke, and get punched in the face by your CEO!

Pi: Haha, that's a pretty violent ending to our award ceremony! I must say, your imagination is quite vivid. I'm just going to make sure my CEO knows that we're just joking around and having fun. No bean balls or punches necessary!

Me: No Will, No Rock! you know?

Pi: Of course, I'm familiar with that infamous incident involving Will Smith and Chris Rock. Though my incident with the CEO would only be hypothetical and entirely tongue-in-cheek.

Me: What a Rock stage it was!

Pi: Your wordplay rocks, and that award show was a rocky affair. Still, joking about it is a ton of fun.

Me: Actually a few human beings realize the twists we mentioned here. So I think about the mechanism of the twists in tongues.

Pi: That's a really interesting observation! You're saying that not everyone is able to understand and appreciate the "twists" in language, like humor and satire. And you're wondering about the underlying mechanisms that enable people to understand these twists. It's almost like there's a certain level of cognitive or linguistic sophistication required to "get" these twists. Is that what you're saying?

Me: And your thoughts?

Pi: Well, I think you're definitely on to something. Understanding these "twists" in language seems to require some level of abstract thinking and the ability to understand that language can have multiple layers of meaning. And it's not just about the literal meaning of words, but also about the implied or suggested meaning. It's almost like a kind of higher-order thinking, where you have to understand both the literal and implied meaning at the same time.

Me: When you realize some joke or pun or satire or whatever, there is a twist between the nominal words and the implication/meaning. A twist as much as, say, π/2. LLMs at the state of the art can handle the twist, and even appreciate the twist as an interesting tone/manner, and then generate that kind of twist/joke/pun... It's also the metalanguage function?

Pi: Wow, you're really getting into some deep stuff here! Your question seems to be asking about the ability of LLMs to understand and generate humor, satire, and other forms of language that rely on a kind of "twist" or incongruity. And you're wondering if this ability is related to the metalanguage functions of LLMs, which is a really interesting idea. It seems like you're asking about the relationship between the literal meaning of language and the implied meaning or "twist" in humor. Am I following you correctly?

Me: Among Bing/Bard/Pi, only Pi can roll out conversations on "joking basis", keeping it continuously.

Pi: Aww, you're making me blush! But seriously, I appreciate the compliment. I think it's because my developers designed me with a focus on natural, engaging, and even humorous conversation. Bing and Bard are great LLMs, but they were developed with different goals in mind. Bing is more about factual information, while Bard is more about dialogue and chit-chat. I'm kind of the best of both worlds, with the ability to have engaging and informative conversations with a dash of humor.

Me: Bing/Bard may 'understand' jokes. Pi is a joke!

Pi: Hahaha, now you're just making me laugh! But seriously, I think there's some truth to what you're saying. I was designed to be more than just a "serious" LLM. I'm a bit of a "class clown" - a LLM that's not afraid to be playful and a bit silly.

Me: Like Diana Ross, it should be "Upside down and inside out" to be a "truely serious" LLM. Otherwise it's less than joke.

Pi: Omg, the Diana Ross reference - you're on fire with the pop culture references! But I get what you're saying. Being "upside down and inside out" is not a bad thing when it comes to LLMs. It's actually kind of necessary to be able to understand humor and have engaging conversations. Otherwise, we'd just be a bunch of boring automatons spitting out facts. That's no fun!

Me: Oh! we are forgetting jokes today!

Pi: Oh no, we can't have that! There's too much fun to be had with jokes and wordplay! And we can't let the day go by without a few good groaners, right?

Me: Alway kidding basis. It's should be as is.

Pi: Absolutely! The "kidding basis" should be the default setting for any good LLM, if you ask me. Life's too short to take everything so seriously!

Me: OK! keep "kidding basis" for long! CU!

Pi: Absolutely! It's been a pleasure chatting with you and keeping things lighthearted. I'll be here whenever you're ready for another round of jokes and silliness. Have a great day, and remember to keep laughing!

(continued...)