> humans beat calculators because we create them The new calculator will beat the old calculator. Humans don't beat calculators themselves. But only humans ha

> humans beat calculators because we create them The new calculator will beat the old calculator. Humans don't beat calculators themselves. But only humans have the capacity to improve on calculators. And this is truly all we've been doing with science and technology ever since day one. And yes, they're all just tools. AphaGo is just a tool. It told the dude moving the pieces where to move the pieces to beat the world champion who was moving pieces without any help. AlphaGo2 will be a better tool. > much faster than we are able to obtain Would that be that important though? Compare IBM Watson with the Jeopardy champion, except, this time he gets to use Google. Watson has a direct line, Ken Jennings does not. So what? Calculators are the same thing. We don't benefit from a direct link, at least at that level. It gives us the answer, and we can read it. We only want the answer anyway. Having to download all the details is redundant. The mind reading interface is what is clunky, when we're already wireless. Seeing is enough. > ASI and it's calculators will not be. Right, so you're switching to hardware now. Artificial human enhancement is the go-to answer many will give you here, but it's a bit too sci-fi for me. But regardless, the strong-weak divide still stands. We would create tools to solve the problem. And this is where strong AI and calculators will differ, regardless of what other similarities they may have, physical or otherwise.