Artificial Intelligence Jokes

Artificial Intelligence Jokes

It is incredibly hard to find good AI related jokes out there, so I started this collection here. If  you know a great AI joke,  please share it in the comments below.


Amazon 2018 Super Bowl Commercial – Alexa Loses Her Voice Ad (Cardi B, Gordon Ramsey & Sir Anthony Hopkins)

Alexa loses her voice and they (Amazon) have to find a new replacement in this super bowl 52 commercial.


Here some highlights from Yann LeCun's fun page:

  • Deep Belief Nets actually believe deeply in Geoff Hinton.
  • Most farmhouses are surrounded by nice fields. Geoff Hinton's farmhouse lies in a hyper-plain, surrounded by a mean field, and has kernels in la grange.
  • The only kernel Geoff Hinton has ever used is a kernel of truth.
  • Bayesians are the only people who can feel marginalized after being integrated.
  • Shakespeare and Bayes are in a boat, fishing. Bayes is trying to figure out which net to cast when Shakespeare says: "loopy or not loopy? that is the question".

What do you think about AI safety issues?

Lawyer: AI misbehaving? Sue AI!
Nazi: Is AI of higher race? Then it's safe.
Commie: Is AI exploiting or being exploited? Unsafe in any case.
Socialist: Tax the AI to the grave! Will be safe there.
Catholic: If AI believes in God, it's safe.
Feminist: AI is a product of men's chauvinist genderophibic racism! Can't be safe!
LBGT activist: Safe... depends, what orientation does AI have?
Merkel: We'll give asylum to all AIs even if they want to kill us.
Juncker: AI will pay dearly if it attempts to humanxit.
Trump: MAIGA! Grab AI by her pussy.
Hillary: AI came, AI saw, we died.
Stalin: No AI, no problem.
Eurocrat: We've already created 3284 directives to define what AI is. Next 5324 directives will define what safe means.
Einstein: You cannot be more artificially intelligent than naturally stupid.
M.L.King: Forget about dreaming...


This video is so awkward, but I think it was supposed to be funny.

After a year of coding, here's Jarvis.

Posted by Mark Zuckerberg on Tuesday, December 20, 2016

Question: What do you call a blonde who has dyed her hair brown?

Answer: Artificial intelligence.


In a post-apocalyptic world, when robots take over Earth and enslave humans, the robots designed a test to see which humans were useful and who were not. This test consisted of a short piece of text written by a human A and a robot B. Another robot C was given the task to discern this piece of text and identify which was written by human and which was written by the robot. If the robot C failed to identify, then the human was considered successful and the robot was considered a failure. This test was called "Anti-Turing test" *. The humans have inevitably failed this test consistently since time immemorial. Most robots, it seems, feel that human beings can never pass this test, while a handful of them still have hopes for their success.

* Some believe this was named as such with reverence for Turing, while some believe it is an inside joke amongst robots.


Human: What do we want!?
Computer: Natural language processing!
Human: When do we want it!?
Computer: When do we want what?


Q: How many AI people does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: At least 81.

The problem space group (5):

  • One to define the goal state.
  • One to define the operators.
  • One to describe the universal problem solver.
  • One to hack the production system.
  • One to indicate how it is a model of human lightbulb-changing behaviour.

The logical formalism group (16):

  • One to figure out how to describe lightbulb changing in first-order logic.
  • One to figure out how to describe lightbulb changing in second-order logic.
  • One to show the adequacy of FOL.
  • One to show the inadequacy of FOL.
  • One to show that lightbulb logic is non-monotonic.
  • One to show that it isn’t non-monotonic.
  • One to show how non-monotonic logic is incorporated in FOL.
  • One to determine the bindings for the variables.
  • One to show the completeness of the solution.
  • One to show the consistency of the solution.
  • One to show that the two just above are incoherent.
  • One to hack a theorem prover for lightbulb resolution.
  • One to suggest a parallel theory of lightbulb logic theorem proving. 
  • One to show that the parallel theory isn’t complete.
  • One to indicate how it is a description of human lightbulb changing behaviour.
  • One to call the electrician.

The statistical group (1):

  • One to point out that, in the real world, a lightbulb is never “on” or “off”, but usually something in between.

The planning group (4):

  • One to define STRIPS-style operators for lightbulb changing.
  • One to show that linear planning is not adequate.
  • One to show that nonlinear planning is adequate.
  • One to show that people don’t plan; they simply react to lightbulbs.

The robotics group (10):

  • One to build a vision system to recognize the dead bulb.
  • One to build a vision system to locate a new bulb.
  • One to figure out how to grasp the lightbulb without breaking it. 
  • One to figure out how to make a universal joint that will permit the hand to rotate 360+ degrees.
  • One to figure out how to make the universal joint go the other way.
  • One to figure out the arm solutions that will get the arm to the socket.
  • One to organize the construction teams.
  • One to hack the planning system.
  • One to get Westinghouse to sponsor the research. 
  • One to indicate how the robot mimics human motor behaviour in lightbulb changing.

The knowledge engineering group (6):

  • One to study electricians’ changing lightbulbs.
  • One to arrange for the purchase of the lisp machines. 
  • One to assure the customer that this is a hard problem and that great accomplishments, in theory, will come from his support of this effort. 
  • The same can negotiate the project budget.
  • One to study related research.
  • One to indicate how it is a description of human lightbulb changing behaviour.
  • One to call the Lisp hackers.

The Lisp hackers (14):

  • One to bring up the chaos net.
  • One to order the Chinese food
  • One to adjust the microcode to properly reflect the group’s political beliefs.
  • One to fix the compiler.
  • One to make incompatible changes to the primitives.
  • One to provide the Coke.
  • One to re-hack the Lisp editor/debugger.
  • One to re-hack the window package.
  • Another to fix the compiler.
  • One to convert the code to the non-upward compatible Lisp dialect.
  • Another to re-hack the window package properly.
  • One to flame on BUG-LISPM.
  • Another to fix the microcode.
  • One to write the fifteen lines of code required to change the lightbulb.

The Connectionist Group (6):

  • One to claim that lightbulb changing can only be achieved through massive parallelism.
  • One to build a backpropagation network to direct the robot arm.
  • One to assign initial random weights to the connections in the network.
  • One to train the network by showing it how to change a lightbulb (training shall consist of 500,000 repeated epochs).
  • One to tell the media that the network learns “just like a human does”.
  • One to compare the performance of the resulting system with that of traditional symbolic approaches (optional).

The Natural Language Group (5):

  • One to collect sample utterances from the lightbulb domain.
  • One to build an English understanding program for the lightbulb-changing robot.
  • One to build a speech recognition system.
  • One to tell lightbulb jokes to the robot in between bulb-changing tasks.
  • One to build a language generation component so that the robot can make up its own lightbulb jokes.

The Learning Group (4):

  • One to collect twenty light bulbs
  • One to collect twenty “near misses”
  • One to write a concept learning program that learns to identify lightbulbs
  • One to show that the program found a local maximum in the space of lightbulb descriptions

The Game-Playing Group (5):

  • One to design a two-player game tree with the robot as one player and the lightbulb as the other
  • One to write a minimax search algorithm that assumes optimal play on the part of the lightbulb
  • One to build special-purpose hardware to enable 24-ply search
  • One to enter the robot in a human lightbulb-changing tournament
  • One to state categorically that lightbulb changing is “no longer considered AI”

The Psychological group (5):

  • One to build an apparatus which will time lightbulb changing performance.
  • One to gather and run subjects.
  • One to mathematically model the behaviour.
  • One to call the expert systems group.
  • One to adjust the resulting system, so that it drops the right number of bulbs.
*Artificial Intelligence Jokes*
https://www.artificial-intelligence.blog/entertainment/artificial-intelligence-jokes

Some of these are really funny, some of them are probably very awkward! Enjoy the lighter side of AI with some jokes.


#ai #ArtificialIntelligence
Adorable Little Robots by Matt Dixon

Adorable Little Robots by Matt Dixon

2001: A Space Odyssey

2001: A Space Odyssey

You are invited to help this AI blog become better - please comment, share, like, etc. to make it more widely known.

0