President Donald Trump has long demonstrated a unique knack for weaponizing language, turning words and monikers into potent political instruments against his adversaries. During his initial successful presidential campaign, he popularized enduring labels like “Little Marco” and “Crooked Hillary.” He also fundamentally shifted the public lexicon by transforming “fake news” from a straightforward phrase describing deceptive scam media outlets into a broad, derogatory umbrella term for the mainstream press at large. Over the past few weeks, the president has clearly decided to apply that same linguistic playbook to the tech sector, actively working to promote artificial intelligence by branding the technology he wants to accelerate as “super intelligence.” Simultaneously, he has weaponized the word “artificial” as his latest go-to pejorative, culminating in a declaration that those who resist his terminology are “THE ENEMY.” While some of the most prominent figures in the artificial intelligence industry are swiftly falling in line, Trump has picked a notably tough linguistic battle that may not ultimately pan out the way he envisions.
As a longtime booster of technological acceleration, Trump has driven his administration into pro-robot overdrive following an industry conversation regarding the “pacing” of frontier development that took place last month. His current political and economic stance is that safety risks associated with artificial intelligence are profoundly overblown, and that United States companies need to drastically speed up development. This acceleration, in his view, includes the rapid construction of massive data centers—a proposition that he insists will be “very popular,” despite public polling data suggesting otherwise. On top of actively discouraging industry self-regulation, Trump has decided that the technology simply needs a complete rebrand dictated straight from the top. During a rambling address at the United Nations last month, Trump declared that “the use of the word artificial makes intelligence fake” and explicitly promised to rename the technology “super intelligence.” He quickly followed through on that promise by issuing an executive order last week that essentially forbids the use of the traditional abbreviation and terminology wherever possible within federal frameworks.
The resulting administrative changes have been remarkably swift across federal agencies. The U.S. Center for AI Standards and Innovation (CAISI)—which was already a recent rebrand of the original AI Safety Institute—has now been formally renamed the Center for Advancing Innovation and Standards for Super Intelligence, yielding the acronym CAISSI. Meanwhile, Department of Justice press releases have been rapidly modified to incorporate the mandated phraseology. Federal prosecutors recently trumpeted in an official release that a North Carolina man who flooded streaming platforms with algorithmically generated songs between 2017 and 2024 had committed “Super Intelligence-Assisted Music Streaming Fraud.” Escalating his rhetoric further, Trump declared on Thursday that the White House officially considers anyone who continues to use the term “Artificial Intelligence,” as opposed to the new and preferred terminology, to be an adversary of the administration.
Prominent tech industry executives, many of whom rushed to donate millions of dollars to Trump following his election victory, have quickly signed on to the presidential mandate. Elon Musk, frequently described as Trump’s “First Buddy,” has publicly promised to rename SpaceXAI to SpaceXSI by 2026. Tech billionaire Jeff Bezos has likewise declared his support for the shift, noting that he appreciates the change because “artificial is not a very flattering thing.” Jensen Huang, the CEO of Nvidia whom Trump called live on stage last month to rant that robots will not be taking over, has similarly adopted the preferred terminology across public channels. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has also offered praise for the general sentiment, though he clarified that his own company will not be changing its established corporate moniker.
As Trump attempts to force the adoption of SI into the national dialogue, the word “artificial” is increasingly creeping into his vocabulary in the exact manner of earlier political terms like “hoax” and “fake.” He recently announced that his long-favored epithet “fake news media” would be formally retired in favor of calling the press “artificial media.” Furthermore, during an October 5 campaign rally—shortly before musing aloud that Iran could potentially “take out” Los Angeles and San Diego—he declared that public anxieties about regional wars driving up consumer prices were “just artificial.”
Despite the public displays of compliance from certain corners of the tech industry, Trump is functionally demanding that a massive, global sector completely rewrite its foundational terminology. The exact compound word “superintelligence,” written as a single term, long predates Trump’s current affection for the modifier “super,” having been famously popularized in a 2014 book authored by Nick Bostrom. However, that academic term specifically denotes a hypothetical, highly advanced form of machine intelligence that could radically surpass human cognitive capacity, rather than serving as a blanket label for the entire technological category as a whole. Artificial intelligence remains a broad and somewhat nebulous field, and “superintelligence” is just one of several competing industry buzzwords—alongside artificial general intelligence and useful general intelligence—meant to define the speculative future phases of the technology that come after current iterations.
Adopting the terminology might seem superficially advantageous for major corporations that had already hitched their wagon to advanced development, including giants like Meta and Microsoft. Moreover, as broader public opinion begins to turn against unchecked artificial intelligence expansion, certain players in the sector may actively desire a comprehensive public rebrand. However, forcing the immediate, blanket adoption of SI also undercuts the ability of these companies to effectively market major, new, and flashy products as uniquely “superintelligent.” Instead, the executive mandate applies the exact same term to everything from a future machine god down to years-old, basic automated media generation tools. The field is arguably taking a rhetorical downgrade with the addition of a clunky space in the middle, as Trump’s attempts at imposing earnestly favorable names have rarely measured up to the biting efficacy of his signature political insults.
Meanwhile, the president faces the practical reality of having to convince the other branches of government to get entirely on board with the linguistic shift. Trump cannot legally bar the United States Congress from using the phrase “artificial intelligence,” and the traditional terminology is already embedded in existing federal laws, such as Trump’s own signature Take It Down Act. Federal administrative agencies will inevitably need to cite those exact statutes when arguing complex tech cases in court. As political appetite for comprehensive federal regulation continues to grow, congressional Republicans will soon have to decide whether they want to appease Trump by adopting a name that many citizens find unintuitive and heavily freighted with the political baggage of Trump’s deeply unpopular pro-industry, anti-regulatory stance.
To complicate matters further in Washington, prominent pro-regulation lawmakers were already utilizing the earlier, specific definition of superintelligence in their ongoing legislative efforts to restrict powerful technology. Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, cosponsored a bill titled the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act in early September alongside fellow lawmakers in an explicit effort to pause advanced development.
While Donald Trump clearly loves naming things and shaping public narratives, his most effective linguistic victories have historically relied on catchiness, whether through simple, memorable nicknames or distinctively funny turns of phrase. “Super intelligence,” by stark contrast, largely comes across as an administrative euphemism. Millions of Americans harbor tangible, grounded gripes with the tech industry, particularly regarding the rapid physical expansion of power-hungry data centers in local communities, and simply insisting that the technology is “super” does nothing to assuage those legitimate environmental and economic concerns. If anything, Trump’s escalating attempts to strong-arm the public and the private sector into adopting a supposedly nicer term for artificial intelligence risks making both the administration and the industry itself look increasingly vulnerable.
Leave a Reply