Silicon Valley is falling in line with Trump’s attempt to rename AI
President Donald Trump announced plans to rebrand artificial intelligence as "super intelligence," issuing an executive order requiring government agencies to adopt the new terminology. Several Silicon Valley executives have quickly aligned themselves with this directive, demonstrating how the technology sector is attempting to ingratiate itself with Trump's administration after a more contentious relationship during his first term.
Elon Musk announced plans to rename SpaceXAI to SpaceXSI, whilst Salesforce's Marc Benioff rebranded AIForce to SIForce. Nvidia's Jensen Huang committed the company to "$1 billion in super intelligence research," and Microsoft's Satya Nadella repeatedly used the new terminology in a recent post about building "emergency brakes" for AI. Trump explicitly declared that the White House considers those using "artificial intelligence" instead of "super intelligence" to be enemies, with major tech executives including Mark Zuckerberg, Sundar Pichai, Jeff Bezos, and Dario Amodei attending the summit where the executive order was announced.
- Trump rebranded AI as "super intelligence" via executive order.
- Major tech CEOs including Musk, Nadella and Benioff have adopted the term.
- Silicon Valley attempting to ingratiate itself with Trump's administration.
New here? Start with this
President Donald Trump has issued an executive order requiring the federal government to use "super intelligence" instead of "artificial intelligence" as its terminology for AI technology. The directive represents an effort to reshape how the government and technology industry describe the field.
Major companies including SpaceX, Salesforce, Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta, Google, and Amazon have adopted the terminology. Some have renamed divisions and products, whilst others have announced major investment commitments using the new phrasing. This widespread response demonstrates how quickly the technology sector has moved to align with the administration's position.
The technology industry's response reflects the sector's desire to maintain influence with the Trump administration. The President made clear his view that the continued use of "artificial intelligence" represents opposition to his agenda, transforming a terminology choice into a visible marker of support or opposition to his administration.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters argue that the rebranding more accurately reflects genuine technological advancement, with systems now operating at a level of autonomous capability that arguably exceeds traditional 'artificial' intelligence. They contend that voluntary alignment with government framing demonstrates pragmatism and good faith, enabling companies to maintain constructive relations, secure regulatory clarity, and advance policy influence—benefits worth the modest gesture of rebranding.
The case against
Critics contend that voluntary rebranding in response to political signals—especially when the administration frames non-compliance as enmity—represents corporate capitulation that undermines sector independence and establishes a troubling precedent. They argue that this performative alignment avoids substantive engagement with genuine governance concerns, allowing technology companies to prioritise regulatory favour and access over principled, independent development.