|
| ▲ | Lerc an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| It depends on what the joke is. I can see people making an image for a joke that they already have in their head. Or they can AI generate an image and think up with a caption to make whatever it generated is funny (partially clips does exactly this with clipart). Sometimes it can be completely AI generated because the humour comes from seeing how the model misconstrued what it was supposed to do. A lot of these require humans to do the work of curation. I'd be kind of tempted to give these box art images to an AI and ask it to make the game. I suspect there would be much amusement to be had in seeing how they do at a cursed task like that. |
|
| ▲ | kraquepype an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I wish we were still in the "haha funny" era of AI, and we could laugh at the absurdity it came up with. Fun times. One of my favorites: https://www.reddit.com/r/DC_Cinematic/comments/i3kr2z/humor_... |
|
| ▲ | cubefox an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Exception: Gwern's AI-assisted cartoons include some funny ones.
https://gwern.net/doc/fiction/humor/comics/index (scroll down) |
|
| ▲ | Apocryphon 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| tbh, there is some novelty when AI first imitates a distinct human style. And then it gets old immediately after not unlike when VC Twitter discovered AI could imitate Studio Ghibli art. |
| |
| ▲ | krapp 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I've said more than once that no matter how much Ghibli stuff you train an AI on, it's never going to spontaneously come up with a Princess Mononoke or Spirited Away. People don't realize there's an aspect to creativity that dwells within the human brain and the morass of personal visceral human experience that can't be reconstructed and simulated from expression alone - it's a lossy process. And there's more to it than mere randomness and novelty. That's why no matter how good AI gets, it's only ever as good as the human effort put into it. It's very good at being very technically mediocre. |
|
