Build3 publishers2 min readPublished
Trump orders federal agencies to write "Super Intelligence" in place of AI
Donald Trump signed an order on Sept. 29 telling executive agencies to write "Super Intelligence" and "SI" for AI in new documents. Contracts and rules already issued keep their wording, and any change to what the term legally covers would come from a definition the White House science adviser has 60 days to propose.
The Engineer · Build desk

What happened
- The science adviser's draft must assess whether the new term should modify, expand or supersede the existing statutory definition of artificial intelligence.
- The order does not require companies such as OpenAI, Google or Nvidia to rename their products or stop using the term AI.
- The order says today's technologies "far exceed what was envisioned when the term 'Artificial Intelligence' first came into use."
- Trump previewed the rename at the UN General Assembly on Sept. 22, arguing that the word "artificial" makes the technology sound fake.
Compiled by The EngineerSomething wrong?How this is made
Why it matters
- constraint Tools that search, tag or track federal material by the string "AI" will miss new agency documents unless they map "SI" to the same legal scope.
- exposure If Congress enacts an expanded or superseding definition, every obligation already keyed to the statutory AI definition would inherit the new scope.
- contradiction Federal text now uses the word for today's systems while researchers use it for machines better than humans at every task, so a bill banning superintelligence would be read against whichever definition Congress adopts.
The order is written as an alias. While agencies implement it, "SI" covers the same technologies as the federal statutory definition of artificial intelligence [4]. TechRepublic described this as the government changing the label before it changes the underlying legal definition [5].
The drafting gets one thing right. An executive order directs the executive branch within the president's legal authority and does not, by itself, rewrite terms Congress placed in statute [10]. Because the new word is tied to the old definition, agency documents written from now on do not use an undefined term. Anyone who has renamed a column in a live database will recognize the order of operations: add the alias, keep the old name readable, migrate the schema later. The order also limits itself to "the maximum extent permitted by law" [9].
For teams that report to agencies or sell to them, the change shows up first as vocabulary. New executive branch websites, correspondence, reports and policy documents switch to SI [2]. The order's text reaches "in any applicable setting" [9]. Neither report says whether a new solicitation, or a report a contractor files with an agency, counts as one.
The scope question sits in the second provision. The Assistant to the President for Science and Technology has 60 days to submit proposed legislative language defining "Super Intelligence" and "SI" [6]. Counted in calendar days from Sept. 29, the deadline is Nov. 28 [1]. The draft is a proposal to Congress. It changes no statute until Congress passes it [10]. In my view it is still the document to read closely, because it is where a legal scope for the new word would first be written down [6].
Trump has explained the rename in plainer terms. "We're using the word super because the other word is a fake word," he told reporters [13]. Researchers use superintelligence for systems that are better than humans at every task, and Tom's Hardware reports that current frontier models are nowhere near that level [11]. The same outlet reports that Senator Bernie Sanders has co-proposed a bill banning its development, with penalties on par with illegally developing nuclear weapons [12].
What to watch
- The text of the science adviser's proposed statutory definition of Super Intelligence, due around Nov. 28.
- Whether agencies carry SI wording into new solicitations and contractor reporting templates, which would show what "applicable setting" covers in practice.
- How the Sanders superintelligence ban bill defines its term, and whether it overlaps any statutory SI definition Congress takes up.