Tech Industry Rejects Trump’s Authoritarian Rebranding of Artificial Intelligence
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
President Trump’s executive order to rebrand artificial intelligence as “super intelligence” faces strong opposition from tech leaders, who see the move as a political stunt with little chance of adoption outside government.
President Donald Trump issued an executive order instructing federal agencies to replace the term “artificial intelligence” with “super intelligence” (SI) in official communications. This top-down directive, following a closed-door White House meeting with powerful tech CEOs, is part of Trump’s ongoing campaign to manipulate language for political gain, arguing that the word “artificial” undermines the perceived legitimacy of the technology.
Industry representatives told Politico that this rebranding is unlikely to catch on outside the corridors of government power. Adam Kovacevich, chief executive of the Chamber of Progress, criticized the move as a performative gesture designed to force CEOs to publicly align themselves with Trump’s agenda. Adam Thierer, a researcher at the R Street Institute, pointed out that the new label could sow confusion in policy debates, since “superintelligence” already carries a specific meaning in academic circles, highlighting the administration’s disregard for expertise.
A tech lobbyist emphasized that while government language can change at the whim of those in power, the broader industry—driven by actual innovation—moves at its own pace. Major companies whose leaders were summoned to the White House, including NVIDIA, Meta, Google, and others, have not endorsed the administration’s rebranding in their public materials, signaling resistance to political interference.
Meanwhile, bipartisan senators have introduced legislation to hold AI firms accountable for rogue AI agents that could cause cyber-attacks, a necessary step toward regulating an industry too often left to police itself. The proposal is expected to be debated after the November congressional recess.