How do we gauge whether something was designed?

[airportkid]

... we don't know for sure how life came from non-life. But then no one does ...

One of the problems here is that, so far as I know, we haven't yet found a good definition for what constitutes life.

There are probably structures (almost certainly microscopic), or particular processes that cannot be definitely categorized as living or non-living.  The demarcation between life and non-life may be as fuzzy as the demarcation between a river and the sea; with no definite point where one becomes the other.

[Rhythmcs]

A process definition can help (and has the bonus of leaving space for the unknown - for astrobiology and for xenobiology). Insomuch as life is the outcome of a set of metabolic processes, a thing can be lifelike when the conditions of those processes are met. A virus is not alive because it does not have this set of metabolic processes, though it can leverage the ones we have so that it then meets the conditions for life as a process.

I love the comparison to rivers and oceans. Especially since so much of life (as we know it) has to do with energy, solubility, and mixing.

[Cavebear]

... we don't know for sure how life came from non-life. But then no one does ...

One of the problems here is that, so far as I know, we haven't yet found a good definition for what constitutes life.

There are probably structures (almost certainly microscopic), or particular processes that cannot be definitely categorized as living or non-living.  The demarcation between life and non-life may be as fuzzy as the demarcation between a river and the sea; with no definite point where one becomes the other.

I might suggest tidal reach for demarcation between rivers and seas.

"Life" might depend on ability to replicate on its own. The slight difference between RNA and DNA might also matter.

[Bucky Ball]

It would be the sequins.
If you want to know if something was "designed", just look to see if there are sequins sewn or glued on.

[Thingymebob]

It would be the sequins.
If you want to know if something was "designed", just look to see if there are sequins sewn or glued on.

There's usually a label saying made in 'somewhere'.

Never seen one saying made 'outside of space and time'.

[airportkid]

It would be the sequins.
If you want to know if something was "designed", just look to see if there are sequins sewn or glued on.

I dunno.  A box of ice cream sprinkles was accidentally spilled onto a hot griddle in a diner in Ypsilanti in 1933 that instantly melted into a full color portrait of the Virgin Mary with an apparent tattoo on her forearm of an anchor with the word "Mom" beneath it.

Well, it could've happened.

[no one]

We don't.
We allow those with the big smartz to inform us of such things.

As we cheerfully march into the blinding domain of ignorance.

[Paleophyte]

Hyperoptimization in the service of a single or limited number of functions/purposes to the exclusion of all else.

William Paley's infamous pocket watch is an excellent example. That watch will do exactly one thing and it will do it exceptionally well. And every component in that watch is dedicated to that function. From casing to cogwheels there is little of that watch that is not dedicated to the accurate measure of time.

By contrast, natural systems tend to be horrific compromises between hosts of competing and conflicting systems and processes. Our bodies are this mish-mash of systems that work well enough to get the job done but no one of which is optimized to the detriment of the others. We do nothing perfectly but we do everything and anything except breathe fire.

In a watch each component is machined from scratch to do exactly what it must, no less and no more. In nature we find structures built from the bones of previous designs. No sane watchmaker would make a front cover by taking a gear and pounding it so thin that it became transparent. By contrast, nature has no problem making jaw bones from gill arches, ear bones from jaw bones, and an appendix that is either vital or useless depending on your species.

This can be seen even more clearly in the genetic code. As Mordant points out, well written code is simple, elegant, and straight-forward. Every instruction serves a purpose. By contrast the genetic "code" is a nightmare of introns, exons, ERV, pseudogenes, promoters, inhibitors, and vast swaths of apparently non-coding genetic material that does little but sit their and slowly evolve. While well-written computer code might have a system governed by obviously grouped segments of code, but biological systems are governed by genes scattered across every chromosome that an organism possesses with little rhyme or reason.

[Minimalist]

Of course  you are absolutely correct.

However.  You would have lost the religitards at "Hyperoptimization."  They like little words.