logoalt Hacker News

ilaksh01/21/20252 repliesview on HN

Good point, but this is an 8GB model. That's the problem. This is a spectacular answer given that constraint. Also it's hilarious how bad the final answer is.


Replies

HarHarVeryFunny01/21/2025

Yes - impressive how good the small models are getting, and this "reasoning distillation" seems to have given them a significant boost.

Even though humor is largely about the unanticipated punchline, I'd have guessed (maybe wrongly) that there'd be enough analytical discussion of humor in the training set for a reasoning model to come up with a much more plausible attempt at a formulaic type of joke.

From the example given it seems there's too much "thought" put into "what do I have to work with here", and not enough into conceiving/selecting a template for the joke. Maybe part of the problem is that the LLM doesn't realize that, being an LLM, it's best chance at being funny to a human is to closely stick to a formula that humans find funny, and not try to be too smart in trying to deconstruct it.

iamnotagenius01/21/2025

small models can be funny (12b model):

tell me funny story about techbro and real developer who actually ships code

Sure, here's a light-hearted story for you:

---

Once upon a time in Silicon Valley, there was a shiny new startup called "TechBro Inc." It was filled with eager young techbros, all wearing their "10x Developer" t-shirts, and sipping on their $8 cold-pressed juices. Among them was Chad, the self-proclaimed "Tech Bro King."

Chad was always posting his impressive code snippets on his social media profiles, bragging about how he could "crush" any coding challenge in no time. He was the epitome of a techbro, all talk and no walk.

Meanwhile, in the corner, there was Alex, the quiet, unassuming developer who actually shipped code. Alex didn't have flashy t-shirts or a massive online following, but the company's products worked, and that was thanks to Alex.

One day, TechBro Inc. decided to host a "Hackathon" to impress their investors. Chad saw this as his opportunity to shine. He spent the entire day tweeting about his progress, posting screenshots of his code, and even live-streaming his "epic coding session."

Alex, on the other hand, quietly sat at his desk, coding away. He didn't take any breaks for photoshoots or live streams. He was there to work, not to perform.

As the hackathon came to a close, Chad confidently declared, "I've just finished the most amazing feature ever! It's going to revolutionize our app!" The room erupted in applause, and Chad basked in the glory.

The next day, the team gathered to demo their new features. Chad confidently presented his "revolutionary" feature. He clicked the button to launch it, but nothing happened. He tried again, and again, but the app remained unchanged. Chad's face turned red, and sweat dripped down his forehead.

It was Alex's turn. He quietly stepped up, clicked a button, and suddenly, the app was filled with new, useful features. The team gasped in awe. The investors were impressed. The app actually worked, and that was thanks to Alex.

Chad, trying to save face, turned to Alex and said, "Well, Alex, it seems you've just... shipped some code. Not bad for a... real developer."

The room burst into laughter. From that day forward, Chad learned the difference between talking about coding and actually doing it. And Alex? He just kept shipping code, one line at a time.

---

show 1 reply