Brandon Fletcher
The phrase “Super Intelligence” certainly has a captivating allure, especially when the conversation around artificial intelligence often borders on the absurd and embarrassing.
We must acknowledge that terminology serves a purpose. Those of us who strive for accuracy in language cannot simply replace the established term “artificial intelligence”—a recognized and legitimate technology—just because the President of the United States prefers a different label.
Ironically, the term “Super Intelligence” has provided more amusement in tech jargon than “X, the everything app” has in recent memory.
The President’s initiative to rebrand this technology began on September 19 with an online survey, inviting the public to vote on a new name. Just three days later, he settled on “Super Intelligence,” a term that was not even included in the initial poll options. Initially, the whole idea felt surreal, almost laughable, as another cringe-worthy chapter in a minor political saga that escalated when Trump shared 60 AI-generated posts over the Labor Day weekend.
Since then, it appears that Trump is entirely dedicated to persuading the global community to adopt the term Super Intelligence. He instructed diplomats to use the new phrase and claimed success in convincing Chinese President Xi Jinping to follow suit. He escalated his efforts by signing an executive order mandating that the executive branch of the federal government adopt the term, coinciding with a historic gathering of AI industry leaders to endorse a document referred to as the “White House Accord on Super Intelligence.”
In a display of confidence, he showcased these industry leaders to the media, asserting that they collectively agreed on the name change, declaring, “the name has been officially changed by the biggest, the smartest, the greatest people anywhere in the world at this.”
But was there really consensus? I reported yesterday that it was unclear whether they truly agreed. Meta informed me that Mark Zuckerberg—who allegedly played a crucial role in the “White House Accord on Super Intelligence”—does occasionally use the term “superintelligence,” but that carries a different meaning. OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google did not respond to my inquiries yesterday.
Nevertheless, Elon Musk and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang both signaled their endorsement of the rebranding during a panel discussion. They nodded in agreement with asset manager Gavin Baker as he remarked, “I guess we’re now calling this Super Intelligence, which I think is actually good branding.” They incorporated the term into their responses. To further cement his support, Musk posted simply on X, stating “Super Intelligence.” Huang elaborated, writing, “The future of Super Intelligence will be shaped not only by what it can do, but by the confidence it earns.”
This situation is a farcical spectacle reminiscent of when citizens in the Soviet Union were instructed to call their Christmas trees New Year trees, only this feels even more forced and abrupt.
While there is no public polling regarding this name change, it’s difficult to imagine it gaining widespread acceptance. The reactions so far appear largely negative—even from potential supporters of Trump. For example, far-right White House correspondent Natalie Winters, associated with Steve Bannon’s War Room, expressed her disapproval, stating, “Hammering ‘Super Intelligence’ and playing all those games is not what people voted for.”
On X, the everything app, users are expressing their disdain for the term:
I speak for everyone – we are NOT calling it “Super Intelligence”
We are deadnaming it and calling it Artificial Intelligence just like Twitter.
— Evanit0 (@Evanit0) September 30, 2026
A conspiracy theory is gaining traction, alleging that Trump is involved in a scheme to profit from domain name arbitrage, suggesting this is the real motive behind the rebranding. this remains purely circumstantial and should be categorized as speculation.
During a press event in the Oval Office on Wednesday, we caught a glimpse of the new normal with a carefully crafted question about Super Intelligence. The question, delivered in an overly cheerful tone reminiscent of a birthday celebration, was not particularly probing:
“Mr. President, you just signed the Super Intelligence agreement with the tech industry leaders, do you think the Democrats drop the end-of-the-world talk now, or is that their midterm message?”
Trump responded by reiterating his discontent with the term artificial intelligence, indicating that he is fixated on the negative implications of artificiality. He described “artificial” as “a terrible word,” adding, “It’s amazing it lived on so long actually.”
This overlooks the fact that “artificial” is a precise and functional term, while the term “intelligence” presents its own set of challenges.
As the midterms approach, Trump is likely entering a more challenging phase of his presidency, where he will have to navigate a less accommodating Congress, and potentially face significant opposition.
Meanwhile, an executive order from earlier this week indicates that he plans to leverage what he refers to as Super Intelligence to “streamline” public access to government services. His administration recently launched a chatbot and is instructing government agencies to implement it as a public-facing tool. The concept appears to be that citizens will soon interact with America.org, facilitating access to government services with ease.
Not even two weeks ago, he announced the establishment of an “AI Force” led by an AI czar—though it is likely that a rebranding for those terms is imminent.
As Trump seems increasingly immersed in this technological fixation, one must wonder if the industry leaders who support this obsession will continue to do so willingly. This remains uncertain. OpenAI explicitly incorporates “AI” in its name. Google/Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai’s acceptance of the term appears lukewarm—his mention of the White House Accord on Super Intelligence on X lacked additional context.
Most telling is Elon Musk’s lack of commitment. After his brief endorsement of “Super Intelligence” on X, Musk reverted to using the now supposedly obsolete term “AI” in a humorous tweet: “Best way to sandbox an AI is to put it on a Delta flight – it will have no chance of accessing the Internet!”
It seems likely that none of these leaders—aside from perhaps Zuckerberg—are prepared to fully adopt this new terminology. They may resort to using the established terms when they believe they are beyond scrutiny.
These business leaders, along with their teams, customers, and the general public, may be resistant to this new term. Trump, who himself has low popularity, is insisting on the term “Super Intelligence” and has signed an order mandating that his administration “will not acknowledge the usage of ‘Artificial Intelligence’ and ‘AI’ in any applicable setting.” For those in the business community, this is the term they are expected to use, regardless of personal preference.
Daniel Mercer
David Bridges
