The Problem with Christians

[AJW333]

 Despite being more designed than ever before, computers became smaller, simpler, easier to produce with less parts, with simplicity of function being the watchword when it comes to design and interface. They went from room-filling technological monstrosities that required specialized knowledge and tools just to operate, to something you can hold in the palm of your hand, turn on with a single button, and operate with your finger. Outwardly, in terms of mechanics and parts, and inwardly, in terms of software and control options, computers are getting simpler, not more complex

, and this is a trend that can be applied to every piece of technology that people regularly work with: everything about the history of design that you've been exposed to indicates that greater design is accompanied by greater simplicity, greater ease of use, and greater unification and connectivity between devices.

We shouldn't assume that compact means simple,

"In 1971, the first-gen Intel processor sported 2,300 transistors and ran at 740,000Hz. The latest fourth-gen Intel Core processor has 1.7billion transistors and runs as 3,000,000,000Hz." http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/126289-i...in-a-brain

My argument so far has been focused on the complexity of DNA code. If you look at the code used in computers today, it is huge. The first home computers had a capacity of 64kb whereas now, just the operating system on windows 10 alone is 16gb. That is a massive rise in information and therefore complexity. Sure, the end result is ease of use and greater function, but this requires a giant increase in the intelligent design of the software. How many man-hours did it take to develop the windows operating systems?

... So, why the watchmaker argument? Your entire relationship with demonstrable design suggests that complexity does not correlate with design,

That's not what I'm saying. Complexity suggests design because a reduction in entropy is observed.