Trump calls users of the term 'AI' the enemy

By Splitfeed EditorialLast updated Oct 8, 2026, 17:30 UTC

On October 8, 2026, President Donald Trump declared that anyone who uses the term 'Artificial Intelligence' is 'the enemy,' insisting the technology should be referred to as 'super intelligence' instead. The declaration was reported across multiple outlets including The Independent, Arab News, Forbes, and AOL. The announcement did not arrive without context: Yahoo had reported two days earlier, on October 6, that a 'Super Intelligence Force' initiative was already taking shape within the administration, suggesting the renaming push is connected to a broader organizational or branding effort at the federal level.

The distinction Trump is drawing is not merely cosmetic. 'Artificial Intelligence' and 'super intelligence' carry different meanings in technical and research communities. AI is a broad umbrella term covering everything from image recognition to large language models, while super intelligence typically refers to a hypothetical future system that exceeds human cognitive ability across all domains. New Scientist noted on October 8 that Trump is not the only figure who conflates or blurs this distinction, and experts cited by Business Post on October 6 were already sceptical of the push to rename the field before the October 8 declaration. Whether the administration intends a substantive policy difference or is primarily pursuing a branding shift remains an open question, as the specific policy details behind the renaming effort have not been reported.

No published reactions from the Pro-AI, Anti-AI, or Middle Ground camps have emerged yet. Typically, Pro-AI voices would likely focus on whether the rebranding signals stronger federal commitment and investment in frontier AI development, potentially welcoming the attention even while debating the terminology. Anti-AI voices would be expected to treat the episode as evidence of superficial or confused policymaking, arguing that branding exercises distract from substantive safety and governance questions. Middle Ground commentators would probably ask whether the 'Super Intelligence Force' initiative represents a real shift in research priorities and funding, or whether the label change amounts to little more than rhetoric.

The clearest thing to watch next is whether the 'Super Intelligence Force' initiative produces concrete policy documents, executive orders, or budget allocations. If formal federal guidance begins replacing 'artificial intelligence' with 'super intelligence' in official communications, the renaming effort would move from declaration to institutional fact, and the debate over what the terminology actually commits the administration to would sharpen considerably.