That is not an argument.
What you would know is that humans had assembled it. You are free to make whatever suppositions about them being intelligent you want but it does not prove it irrefutably.
Who cares who did the actually assembling? The assemblers are not doing design work.
When I read the title of this thread, I formed an impression that this thread would be a defense of a rather silly argument, but I am of course, well aware that threads cannot be judged by their title.
Then I read this last post of yours, in which the silly argument that I expected upon reading the title, was put forth explicitly.
In the case of a super computer, we can likely identify from company records, every person involved in the design. We can interview them and review their records, notes, etc., and gain insight into their reasoning, the tradeoffs they made, and their design goals.
If we want we can review their credentials, and their academic backgrounds.
Or we can just look at textbooks describing the design principles, where we know those engineers read and used such textbooks, and we can identify where those principles are applied.
All of the above are things any fool could come up with. Yet you still want to argue that whether the design of a computer/car/etc. was intelligent is a matter of speculation and supposition.
Surely, you jest.
Herr Ober, zhalen bitte.
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison