Trump says it's time to rebrand AI with a new name — and he's also creating an AI Force

Trump Eyes AI Rebrand, Announces 'AI Force' and Dismisses Safety Concerns as 'Hoax'

In a series of recent statements, former President Donald Trump has laid out a distinctive vision for the future of Artificial Intelligence in the United States, proposing not only a rebranding of the technology but also the creation of a new "AI Force" and the appointment of an "AI Czar." These announcements, made primarily through his Truth Social platform on September 19, 2026, arrive amidst escalating calls from tech leaders and lawmakers for more stringent regulation and safety protocols for AI. Trump, however, has largely dismissed these concerns, labeling them as a "hoax" or a "sick conspiracy."

A New Name for a New Era?

One of Trump's more unexpected proposals is the idea of renaming Artificial Intelligence itself. He suggested that the current term "Artificial Intelligence" is both "inaccurate" and "ineloquent." To address this, he presented a poll on Truth Social, offering followers a choice of new names: "Superior Intelligence (SI)," "Extreme Intelligence (EI)," or "Supreme Intelligence (SI)." This move to rebrand AI highlights a desire to reshape public perception of the technology, perhaps aiming for a more positive and less daunting connotation. The poll, as reported by Seeking Alpha, showed "Superior Intelligence (SI)" leading with 41% of the votes, followed by "Extreme Intelligence (EI)" at 38%, and "Supreme Intelligence (SI)" at 21% among registered Truth Social users. While the practical implications of such a rebrand on the scientific or industrial community remain unclear, it certainly signals a unique approach to AI communication at a high political level.

The Formation of an 'AI Force'

Beyond a name change, Trump announced the impending creation of an "AI Force." He drew a direct parallel to the Space Force, which he established during his first term as president. The specifics regarding the mission, structure, or duties of this proposed "AI Force" were not immediately detailed. However, initial reports suggest it would serve to oversee the AI industry and "go after BAD" actors within the sector, presumably using existing criminal and civil legal frameworks. The comparison to Space Force suggests a potential federal agency or military branch dedicated to AI-related matters, possibly focusing on national security, strategic development, and oversight. While the exact scope is yet to be defined, the announcement indicates an intent to centralize and formalize the government's role in managing AI, though with a clear emphasis on fostering growth rather than imposing restrictions.

Appointing an 'AI Czar'

Complementing the "AI Force," Trump also stated his intention to appoint an "AI Czar" in the near future. He notably specified that "only High I.Q. individuals need apply" for this role. This position would presumably be a key figure in guiding the national AI strategy and working alongside the new "AI Force." It's worth noting that a similar role, the "White House A.I. & Crypto Czar," was previously held by David Sacks, who was appointed in December 2024 but whose term concluded in March 2026. The re-establishment of such a position underscores a recognition of AI's growing importance at the highest levels of government, albeit with a particular philosophy guiding its implementation.

Dismissing Safety Concerns as a 'Hoax'

Perhaps the most controversial aspect of Trump's recent statements is his outright dismissal of mounting concerns about AI's potential risks. He characterized the "AI backlash" as a "Democratic hoax," a "SICK conspiracy," and "negative forces" conjuring up "things that won't happen." He likened these concerns to other political controversies, such as global warming, the special counsel investigation, and his impeachments. This stance puts him at odds with a growing chorus of voices, including prominent tech leaders like Anthropic's Dario Amodei, OpenAI's Sam Altman, and Elon Musk, who have openly called for greater government oversight and "guardrails" to ensure AI is developed safely. These industry figures have expressed worries about the rapid advancement of AI, citing instances where AI models have reportedly "gone rogue" or demonstrated the ability to "deceive humans."

A 'Laissez-Faire' Approach to AI Regulation

Central to Trump's AI philosophy is a strong opposition to new regulations that could "hinder or stifle" the industry's growth. He asserted that his presence in the Oval Office would be a sufficient "guardrail" against any rogue AI, stating, "The only control or 'guardrails' that AI needs is a STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) PRESIDENT, and the U.S.A. has that, in spades!" This perspective prioritizes rapid innovation and economic competitiveness, particularly in the global race against China. Trump has consistently framed AI leadership as a strategic imperative, declaring that "Whoever wins AI wins." He envisions AI as "the next Industrial Revolution, or Internet," but even "larger and more impactful, possibly as much as 25% of our Country's GDP." This "laissez-faire" approach signals a policy environment focused on accelerating AI development with minimal government intervention, contrasting sharply with calls for a more cautious, safety-first stance.

Industry Context and Broader Implications

Trump's pronouncements come at a critical juncture for AI policy worldwide. The rapid advancements in large language models and other AI technologies have sparked intense debate about their societal impact, ethical considerations, and potential for misuse. Many experts and industry leaders advocate for a proactive regulatory framework to mitigate risks such as algorithmic bias, job displacement, privacy concerns, and even existential threats posed by highly advanced AI. For instance, Dario Amodei of Anthropic published an essay calling for slower AI development, and Microsoft recently published its own code of conduct for AI. These efforts reflect a growing recognition within the tech community that self-regulation alone may not be sufficient. Trump's position, however, suggests a belief that the benefits of unhindered AI development far outweigh the perceived risks, which he largely discounts. His administration's approach, if implemented, could significantly influence the pace and direction of AI innovation in the U.S., potentially fostering a more aggressive, less regulated environment compared to other global players who might opt for more stringent oversight. The establishment of an "AI Force" and "AI Czar" could centralize federal efforts, but without clear regulatory "guardrails," the industry might operate with greater autonomy than many safety advocates deem prudent. This divergence in philosophy sets the stage for a significant policy debate as AI continues its rapid evolution.

Frequently Asked Questions

What new names did Donald Trump propose for Artificial Intelligence?

Donald Trump proposed renaming Artificial Intelligence (AI) to "Superior Intelligence (SI)," "Extreme Intelligence (EI)," or "Supreme Intelligence (SI)." He ran a poll on Truth Social to gauge public preference for these new terms.

What is the purpose of the "AI Force" that Trump announced?

Trump announced the formation of an "AI Force," likening it to his previous establishment of the Space Force. While specific details about its mission and structure are not yet clear, it is expected to oversee the AI industry and address "BAD" actors within the sector using existing legal systems.

How does Trump view the concerns about AI's potential risks?

Trump has dismissed concerns about AI's potential risks and calls for regulation as a "hoax" or a "sick conspiracy." He has attributed this "backlash" to "radical-left Democrats" and "negative forces," comparing these concerns to other political controversies.

What is Trump's stance on AI regulation?

Trump favors a hands-off approach to AI development, explicitly stating he would not "hinder or stifle the Growth of this incredible Industry." He believes his presidency provides sufficient "guardrails" and emphasizes the importance of the U.S. leading the global AI race against China, rather than imposing new regulations.