The most surprising aspect of this interview with Professor Goodman is the divide that Shneiderman draws between partner and tool regarding to AI. In response to questions about AI taking over the world, we see that Shneiderman in a sense throws out the concerns by saying that right now AI is more of a tool than anything--something that we have full control over and do not need to worry about taking control of us in the same sense that today's computers are tools even though they are technically infinitely smarter than us. What I do see Shneiderman alluding to, however, is the fact that A.I may eventually actually become a partner with us given its ability to exponentially make our life easier and the coming application it will have to various parts of our lives. Since A.I will eventually become integrated with day-to-day life and become essential to advancing all aspects of life, I can see how this partnership may workout in that it helps us so much that we may view it as an equal(and much more human-like than computers). I found this aspect of the interview a bit confusing but also very enlightening in that the line between tool and partner I never really saw as essential but now can see very clearly, though I still have questions regarding at which point a tool crosses to a partner.
Crossing into what potential questions I would ask Shneierman, I would ask just exactly that "What exactly differentiates tool from partner and why is A.I considered a tool right now but not our peers(who many consider partners) who are much less useful than A.I or any computer. Is the aspect of emotion and consciousness really that essential to our understanding of each other and the aspects of our day-to-day life? Although I now see the line between partner and tool very clearly, I still struggle to see what differentiates the two and what that crossover point will be that makes A.I turn from tool to partner.