Zone1 Our Fine-Tuned Universe: Accident or Intelligent Design?

[ding]

Humans created only one thing that is considered intelligent so far AI. All the rest are simply functional.

That just simply isn't true. PLC logic, automation systems and whole host of other control systems are programmed to perform certain tasks based upon certain inputs. That's intelligence.

 

[ding]

Feel free to debunk the calculation. I have asked you once already.

Why would I need to prove something that is based upon flawed logic especially when it starts with the concession that humans have created artificial intelligence?

 

[ding]

I have proven that your assertion that it's statically likely based on humans is faulty. Something you keep on sidestepping. Point out the flaw in the calculation. It's mathematical you're an engineer should be a breeze.

No. You didn't. You have proven you are illogical.

 

[forkup]

First of all, you never conceded anything to me. You told me someone you trusted convinced you but what you were writing were my arguments. So you lied. In a year or two, I fully expect to see you making the arguments I've made today like they were your own. And when asked about it, you'll probably lie about that too.

You keep making irrelevant arguments. You see it as intelligence coming from non-intelligence but everything came from intelligence. That's my argument. But for the sake of argument, it doesn't matter because the only thing that matters is that we know first hand that it is human nature to make smart things. You are an idiot for arguing otherwise.

You argue that intelligence inherently creates intelligence, yet you admit non-intelligent life led to intelligence through evolution. That’s circular reasoning—you’re making intelligence a prerequisite while also claiming it arose from non-intelligence. That’s not logic; it’s an unfalsifiable assumption.

And your claim that it is 'human nature' to create intelligence ignores that AI was developed by less than 0.0125% of humanity. The vast majority of humans—historically and today—have never created intelligence. Your argument misuses statistics and selectively applies human achievements to support a predetermined conclusion.

 

[ding]

You argue that intelligence inherently creates intelligence, yet you admit non-intelligent life led to intelligence through evolution. That’s circular reasoning—you’re making intelligence a prerequisite while also claiming it arose from non-intelligence. That’s not logic; it’s an unfalsifiable assumption.

And your claim that it is 'human nature' to create intelligence ignores that AI was developed by less than 0.0125% of humanity. The vast majority of humans—historically and today—have never created intelligence. Your argument misuses statistics and selectively applies human achievements to support a predetermined conclusion.

Yep, intelligence that is smart enough will create intelligence. Ever hear of artificial intelligence?

 

[forkup]

Why would I need to prove something that is based upon flawed logic especially when it starts with the concession that humans have created artificial intelligence?

Point out the flaw instead of asserting it exists. The fact that's all you're doing doesn't help your case.

 

[ding]

Have humans created artificial intelligence?

Yes, humans have created artificial intelligence (AI). It's a field of computer science focused on developing machines that can perform tasks that typically require human intelligence. This includes things like learning, problem-solving, and decision-making. While the concept of AI has been around for a while, it has become increasingly sophisticated and integrated into various aspects of modern life.

 

[forkup]

Yep, intelligence that is smart enough will create intelligence. Ever hear of artificial intelligence?

And yet intelligence was created from non-intelligence to.

 

[ding]

Point out the flaw instead of asserting it exists. The fact that's all you're doing doesn't help your case.

The flaw is humans have created artificial intelligence and that's all that is required to prove that it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence.

 

[ding]

And yet intelligence was created from non-intelligence to.

Only if you assume that intelligence didn't create the universe. But even then your argument would be that intelligence was destined to arise because intelligence came from non-intelligence. And I win again because my argument is that intelligence arising from non-intelligence is proof that the universe was created to create intelligence such that intelligence arose from non-intelligence.

 

[forkup]

Have humans created artificial intelligence?

Yes, humans have created artificial intelligence (AI). It's a field of computer science focused on developing machines that can perform tasks that typically require human intelligence. This includes things like learning, problem-solving, and decision-making. While the concept of AI has been around for a while, it has become increasingly sophisticated and integrated into various aspects of modern life.

Yes, ai exist we have established that, multiple, multiple, multiple times. What you have not established is that intelligence as a rule makes intelligence. Not across the animal kingdom and not across humanity were the people who actually did constitute a statistical insignificant percentage of the global population past and present.

 

[forkup]

The flaw is humans have created artificial intelligence and that's all that is required to prove that it is the nature of intelligence to create intelligence.

Again. Is it the nature of humans to howl at the moon despite the fact that some people do? Answer if you dare.

 

[ding]

Yes, ai exist we have established that, multiple, multiple, multiple times. What you have not established is that intelligence as a rule makes intelligence. Not across the animal kingdom and not across humanity were the people who actually did constitute a statistical insignificant percentage of the global population past and present.

When intelligence can create intelligence, it does. That's what the data shows.

 

[ding]

Again. Is it the nature of humans to howl at the moon despite the fact that some people do? Answer if you dare.

Only the ones that are so inclined to do so, just as intelligence creating intelligence is limited to those that are inclined to do so.

 

[ding]

I really do have a self driving car.

 

[forkup]

When intelligence can create intelligence, it does. That's what the data shows.

My brother is intelligent he has never created anything intelligent. You are I doubt you are in the field of ai. How can something be in the nature of humanity when only a few actually do something?

 

[ding]

My brother is intelligent he has never created anything intelligent. You are I doubt you are in the field of ai. How can something be in the nature of humanity when only a few actually do something?

Maybe by your definition of intelligence.

Because it's not a function of humanity. It's a function of intelligence. I am only using humans as a proxy for intelligence because humans - relative to all other know species - is the most intelligent.

But is it really just a few? I say it's not. I say we make all kind of smart things but you have limited it to AI. I think you are dishonest about that.

 

[forkup]

Only the ones that are so inclined to do so, just as intelligence creating intelligence is limited to those that are inclined to do so.

You can’t have it both ways. If intelligence inherently creates intelligence, then all intelligent beings—including all humans—would do it, yet the vast majority don’t. If only some intelligent beings create intelligence, then it’s not a universal trait—it’s just a behavior exhibited by a select few. Which is it?

 

[forkup]

Maybe by your definition of intelligence.

Because it's not a function of humanity. It's a function of intelligence. I am only using humans as a proxy for intelligence because humans - relative to all other know species - is the most intelligent.

It's not just a proxy, it's quite literally your only example.

 

[ding]

You can’t have it both ways. If intelligence inherently creates intelligence, then all intelligent beings—including all humans—would do it, yet the vast majority don’t. If only some intelligent beings create intelligence, then it’s not a universal trait—it’s just a behavior exhibited by a select few. Which is it?

I can have it both ways. Besides, I've already addressed this. It doesn't have to be universal. Humans are just a proxy for intelligence. It takes a certain level of intelligence to create intelligence.