I don't need to make a suggestion on how something came to be, It would be up to the person who says it happened in a certain way to provide the evidence to support that. It is not evidence in any meaningful way to say because it's here now therefore it must have been done by humans. It likely was but that doesn't mean it was entirely done by humans absent any external input.
Claiming that these ideas were the sole creation of humans with zero external input seems to be the same argument that intelligent design people make when they look at the complexity of biological systems. Are you a proponent of intelligent design? Because they draw the same conclusions that something of such complexity must have had an initial creator.
If you bother to read up a few comments you will see the entire point of this thread is that there is a base assumption that AI cannot create anything absent the supplied input that they've been given. So refocus on that and my response that humans have not been shown to create anything absent the supplied input that they have been given. To make an assumption that humans created something absent inputs would require an extraordinary amount of proof demonstrating that that's possible.
I have no idea how you would demonstrate that's possible because humans continually receive input from their surroundings all of the time.
Yeah, making sure there's a standard of cleanliness or food safety in restaurants seems kind of pointless, right? If the consumer eats that food, it's their fault for sure.
How is this at all related to what the person was saying? They made no mention of financial corruption. They're explicitly talking about speech and press.
