Donald Trump used part of his United Nations General Assembly speech to propose replacing the term “artificial intelligence,”
or AI, with “super intelligence,” or “SI.” Trump argued that the word “artificial” makes intelligence sound fake and said he wanted
the new terminology used in U.S. government documents, while also rejecting international efforts to regulate the technology.
Trump acknowledged that emerging technologies bring challenges but compared concerns about
AI risks to earlier warnings about climate change. He said the United States should continue developing the technology
while monitoring it through the Department of Justice, arguing that America should not retreat from technological advances.
The proposal quickly drew criticism and mockery, including from some commentators who questioned the timing and practicality of the idea.
The term “superintelligence” already has a specific meaning in AI research, generally referring to a hypothetical system whose capabilities surpass those of humans.
The article also notes that no formal directive had yet been confirmed to make the proposed terminology change official.
The proposal follows several other renaming efforts associated with Trump’s second term, including the use of “Gulf of America” instead of “Gulf of Mexico” in federal terminology.
The article argues that changing references to AI throughout government documents, websites, contracts, regulations and software could require significant time and resources if the proposed rebranding were formally implemented.
Trump Drops Bombshell AI Rebrand at UN — And Even His Own Supporters Mock It
Donald Trump’s proposal to rename artificial intelligence “super intelligence” has sparked controversy,
raised eyebrows across the technology industry, and drawn criticism from some of his own political allies.
President Donald Trump has once again sparked a heated debate after making an unexpected announcement during his address to the United Nations General Assembly.
This time, the controversy is not about trade, immigration, or foreign policy. Instead,
Trump wants to change one of the technology industry’s most familiar terms: artificial intelligence, commonly known as AI.
During his September 22, 2026, speech at the United Nations,
Trump suggested that artificial intelligence should officially be called “super intelligence,” or SI,
arguing that the word “artificial” makes the technology sound fake.
The announcement quickly attracted attention online, with critics questioning whether changing
the name of a technology is a meaningful policy decision or simply another example of Trump’s unconventional political style.
Why Trump Wants to Rename Artificial Intelligence
Trump explained his reasoning during his UN address, arguing that the word “artificial” gives the wrong impression of a technology he considers remarkably powerful.
According to the president, the term makes intelligence sound fake, even though modern
AI systems can perform increasingly sophisticated tasks involving writing, coding, research, and problem-solving.
He said the United States would begin replacing the traditional terminology in government documents, adding that he hoped other countries would eventually follow the same approach.
Trump presented “super intelligence” as a more appropriate description of the technology and suggested that the new abbreviation, SI, could become widely accepted.
However, the proposal immediately raised questions.
Artificial intelligence is a long-established scientific term used by researchers, universities, technology companies, governments, and businesses around the world.
Simply changing the terminology does not change how the technology works or what it can actually accomplish.
Even Trump’s Supporters Question the Idea
One of the most striking aspects of the controversy was the criticism coming from people who generally support Trump’s political positions.
Conservative commentator Matt Walsh mocked the proposal, describing it as “bizarrely dystopian” and questioning why the administration was focusing on a terminology change amid other pressing national concerns.
The criticism highlighted a potential problem for Trump: even loyal supporters may be reluctant to embrace every announcement when they believe it distracts from more immediate economic or political priorities.
The reaction also demonstrated how a proposal intended to present the administration as forward-looking could instead become a source of ridicule.
For critics, the central question was straightforward: would renaming AI accomplish anything substantial,
or would it merely change the language used to describe the same technology?
Why the Technology Industry Is Paying Attention
Trump’s proposal is not simply a social media talking point.
It could affect how federal agencies and American officials communicate about emerging technology.
Following his UN remarks, the US State Department instructed diplomats in its Bureau of International Organization
Affairs to use “super intelligence” instead of “artificial intelligence” in relevant communications.
The change places government terminology at the centre of a much broader discussion about the future of AI and the role governments should play in regulating it.
Technology companies, meanwhile, face a different challenge.
Their products, research papers, marketing materials, and public communications have relied on the term AI for years.
Replacing it across an entire industry would require more than a presidential announcement.
Some technology leaders have publicly echoed Trump’s preferred terminology,
while the wider industry continues to grapple with the implications of the proposed shift.
The controversy has also raised questions about whether business leaders are adopting
the language because they genuinely agree with the president or because publicly challenging the administration could carry political and commercial risks.
The Bigger Debate: AI Safety or Better Branding?
Trump’s announcement comes amid continuing international disagreements over AI regulation and safety.
Supporters of rapid technological development argue that excessive regulation could slow innovation and weaken America’s competitive position against countries such as China.
Critics, however, believe governments need stronger safeguards to address potential risks involving misinformation, cybersecurity, employment, privacy, and the misuse of increasingly capable AI systems.
During his UN speech, Trump rejected international efforts that he characterized as attempts to impose excessive control over the technology.
He also compared warnings about AI’s dangers with earlier predictions about other major global threats.
For opponents of his approach, the name-change proposal risks shifting attention away from the substantive questions that policymakers should be addressing.
They argue that the most important issues are not what AI is called, but how it is developed, who controls it, how its risks are assessed, and what protections exist for the public.
Why the Term “Super Intelligence” Could Create Confusion
There is another problem with Trump’s preferred terminology: “superintelligence” already has a specific meaning in AI research and philosophy.
The term is commonly associated with a hypothetical form of intelligence that would surpass human cognitive abilities across a wide range of tasks.
That is not the same thing as every existing artificial intelligence system.
Using “super intelligence” as a blanket replacement for AI could therefore blur an important distinction
between today’s systems and hypothetical future technologies that might exceed human capabilities much more broadly.
Researchers and technology specialists may continue to use established terminology regardless of the administration’s preferred language, particularly when precision matters in scientific discussions.
A new label cannot automatically make existing systems more capable, safer, or more intelligent than they actually are.
Will Trump’s AI Rebrand Catch On?
The long-term success of Trump’s proposal remains uncertain.
The federal government can influence the terminology used in its own communications, and diplomatic instructions can shape how American officials discuss technology abroad.
But persuading the entire global technology industry to abandon a deeply established term is a much more difficult task.
Businesses, researchers, educators, journalists, and everyday users have become accustomed to the abbreviation AI.
Changing that habit would require widespread adoption far beyond the White House.
The criticism from some conservative voices also suggests that the proposal may not enjoy universal support even among Trump’s political base.
Ultimately, the debate may reveal more about the power of political branding than about the technology itself.
Trump has made it clear that he wants language to reflect his administration’s vision of American technological leadership.
Whether “super intelligence” becomes a lasting term or remains a controversial political rebranding effort will depend on how governments, businesses, and the public respond.
For now, one thing is clear: changing the name may be considerably easier than changing the technology — or resolving the difficult questions surrounding its future.