Notes

The US now calls AI "Super Intelligence". What does that mean for Australia?

Last checked:

Published: · Updated:

Short answer: nothing changes in Australian law. The US federal government has changed the word it uses, not the thing it is talking about. Under Executive Order 14434, “Super Intelligence”, or SI, means the same technology US law already calls artificial intelligence.

You will still see “SI” more and more, mostly in US government documents and in posts from a few tech bosses. Here is what happened, what the order actually says, and how to read it from here.

How it happened

The idea came before the paperwork.

  • Around 20 September 2026, Donald Trump ran a naming poll on Truth Social. “Superior”, “Extreme” and “Supreme Intelligence” were among the options, according to an archived excerpt.
  • 22 September, at the UN General Assembly, he said US government documents would switch to “the much more accurate term super as opposed to artificial. So it’s super intelligence.” The same day, a State Department official emailed staff under the subject line “Change in Nomenclature AI to SI”, AP reported.
  • 29 September, he signed EO 14434, “Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence”. On the same day, leaders from Google, Anthropic, Meta, OpenAI, xAI and Nvidia signed the White House Accord on Super Intelligence. Despite the name, the Accord is about safety checks on frontier models. It says nothing about renaming anything.
  • 4 October, Trump announced a “Super Intelligence Force” to coordinate federal work, naming Jay Clayton, Andrew Ferguson, Emil Michael and Scott Kupor to lead it. The Wall Street Journal had reported the day before that Clayton would head the group and deliver a report within 120 days, according to Reuters.
  • 8 October, he posted that the White House considers anyone who still says “Artificial Intelligence” instead of “Super Intelligence” to be “THE ENEMY!” The post did not say what, if anything, would follow.

What the order actually says

The order is short. Four points matter.

It applies to the US executive branch. Federal departments must use “Super Intelligence” and “SI” in place of “Artificial Intelligence” and “AI” in official letters, public communications, websites, reports and policy documents, “to the maximum extent permitted by law”. They also “will not acknowledge the usage of” the old terms. Nothing in the text is addressed to private companies, and nothing in it reaches Australia.

The meaning stays the same. Section 3(a) defines SI as “the technologies and systems encompassed by the term ‘artificial intelligence’ as defined in section 9401(3) of title 15, United States Code”. In other words: same systems, new label.

Old paperwork stays as it is. “Nothing in this section requires the alteration of previously issued regulations, Presidential actions, contracts, grants, or other historical documents.” So you will see AI and SI side by side in US documents for years.

A legal definition may come later. The President’s science and technology adviser has 60 days to propose legislation, including whether a federal SI definition should modify, expand or replace the current AI definition. Until Congress acts on that, it is a proposal.

You can read the full text in the Federal Register. It is short.

Who is using it, and who isn’t

Using it:

  • Elon Musk posted “No more AI / SI / It’s better” on 4 October, and when asked about renaming SpaceXAI to SpaceXSI, replied “Yes, we will make that change”. As of 13 October, the former xAI account on X is @SpaceXSI, display name “SpaceX Super Intelligence”. We have not seen an announcement about the company’s legal name.
  • Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff posted on 9 October: “The era of Super Intelligence is here. AIForce is officially SIForce.” The product had launched as AIforce on 15 September. As of 13 October, Salesforce’s own pages still said AIforce.
  • Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella used “Super Intelligence systems” and “SI” throughout an essay on 10 October about treating AI models as insider risks. That is his wording in an essay, not a company rename.

Not, or not yet: OpenAI, Google and Anthropic had not answered Gizmodo’s questions about the name by its deadline on 29 September. On 4 October, the Washington Examiner reported that the major labs “would not disclose” whether they planned to adopt it. As of 13 October, none of them had announced a rename, and PolitiFact found none had said outright that it would not change.

And in Australia?

As of 13 October 2026, we found no public statement on the new name from the Australian Government, any minister, or regulators such as the Department of Industry, eSafety or the OAIC.

Australian media did cover it, mostly with a raised eyebrow. On ABC, Alan Kohler called it “a typical piece of grandiose marketing that won’t stick”, and offered “other intelligence” as an alternative. The Conversation covered the UN speech in which Trump first proposed it.

What this means for you

  • If you read US documents or deal with US suppliers, treat SI as AI. That is exactly how the order defines it.
  • If a contract or policy uses “SI”, check its own definitions section. If it doesn’t define the term, ask.
  • If someone sells you “SI” as something more advanced than AI, ask which model or system it is and what it does for you, for example drafting a reply to a customer or sorting invoices. The label alone tells you nothing new about the product.

We will update this page as things change. The date it was last checked is at the top.

Sources