Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's kind of ludicrous how complex the blood vessels are.

Considering their role, whoever or whatever created the "blueprints" for them must have been very inteligent.




Or maybe if you get enough rolls of the dice over billions of years you don't need intelligence.


Same thing?


Yup. Pretty sure trained LLMs are functions of the dice rolls provided by the input. What we are now is a function of the dice rolls provided by terrestrial physics.


How?


Because someone did the initial rolling of the dice? Someone bought the dice in their version of LA casino.


There doesn't seem to be any evidence of this but who knows what we'll find.


Who did the rolling of the dice?

But I digress. Arguing with people who believe in world-building RNG Tetris is pointless.


Oh, I imagine we'll keep trying. Each one of us, shaped by both the differing environments we were nurtured in, and our individual genetic nature, will try different ways and means of addressing it with you. Perhaps eventually one argument will succeed, news of its efficacy will spread, and it will come to dominate...


Just to be clear, I wasn't thinking about some biblical God...


I'll take the blame. Dice, rolled.

/s

Let us not assume creation and intelligent design with biological evolution does fine. Too many malicious people claim moral superiority/right to rule when you mix in a claim to a creator of life with evolution. Parismony!


Certainly if credit needs to be given for the design of blood vessels, I'll take all that credit, thank you!

/s

Let us not assume creation and intelligent design with biological evolution does fine. Too many malicious people claim moral superiority/right to rule when you mix in a claim to a creator of life with evolution. Parismony!


Oh, I wasn't thinking about that creator.

The creators I believe in are much closer to actual science than religion.


falsifiable science relies on adjusting to new evidence, so if an invisible being that doesn't interact in our world in any way was able to be quantified in a reproducible experience or experiment, the science would change to accommodate its existence and all fundamental assumptions about reality

Unfalsifiable things are distinctive, in that there is no evidence that would change the assumption. its working backwards to support the unfalsifiable view, as opposed to working forward and adjusting to any result even if it doesnt match the view


If the invisible being doesn't interact with our world in any way,then by definition it cannot be quantified or subjected to experiment?

Also, if the being is super intelligent and running us in a simulation, can you really subject it to experiment?

That would be like processes running in a container going rogue and demanding evidence of their host environment.


and its existence cannot be relied upon to substantiate anything else

the hypothesis wouldn't present itself at all without hearsay, or just be invalidated by all experiments and useless for building upon, compared to just using the substantiated resources at hand: in your analogy that would be all of the other RAM and computational resources to your benefit.

whereas if you play hide and seek with a friend that says theyre going to hide in a magical land you cant access, then you cant play with that friend anymore and thats the totality of the observation, compared to the friend thats ultimately just another process hiding in RAM.


> so if an invisible being that doesn't interact in our world in any way was able to be quantified in a reproducible experience

No invisible beigns here. Our creators are either extinct (killed by a world-altering catastrophe, perhaps) or are somewhere far away where they can observe their creation.


So we can't see them?


Can ants "see" us?

But no, not directly. You did give me a good chuckle.


And their creators?


Doesn't matter who created them.

The point is to discover who or what created us.


It does matter though, because whoever created them would be indirectly (or potentially directly) responsible for them creating us.

The reason you're saying it doesn't matter is because it wrecks your denial of reality.


Your denial of reality is the same. Because even evolution had to start from somewhere. We still haven't figured that out. Living organisms didn't just spring into existence out of nowhere.


Evolution can be spontaneously emerge from basic chemistry, no arbitrary convenient cutoffs needed.


if thats true, whatever created that intelligent being must be VERY intelligent indeed!


*intelligent




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: