lukman-hakim
US President Donald Trump has announced the formation of a new taskforce dedicated to artificial intelligence, which he says will be known as the "Super Intelligence Force." The president revealed the plan in a post on Sunday, stating that the body would be chaired by Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton, according to a report by BBC business reporter Osmond Chia.
According to Trump's statement, the taskforce is intended to secure America's continued leadership in the development of advanced computing technology. It will also serve as a coordinating body for the federal government's interactions with a wide range of outside groups, including consumers, public interest organizations, religious bodies, operators of critical infrastructure, and the companies building the most powerful AI systems.
The announcement follows an executive order signed by the president on 29 September that formally renames artificial intelligence as "Super Intelligence" across official government communications. Trump had previously argued that the word "artificial" made the technology sound "fake," and the order directs departments and agencies to adopt the terms "SI" and "Super Intelligence" in correspondence, websites, reports, and other materials, while no longer acknowledging the older terminology.
Trump also said last week that he would establish a board to oversee AI safety, an initiative that came after several leading technology executives signed what he described as a "morally binding" pact. That agreement, signed on 29 September, included the signatures of executives from major firms such as OpenAI, Anthropic, SpaceX, and Google, signaling at least nominal buy-in from some of the industry's most prominent players.
Beyond Clayton, the taskforce will include several other senior officials. Federal Trade Commission Chair Andrew Ferguson, Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Emil Michael, and Director of the Office of Personnel Management Scott Kupor will all serve as members, according to the president's post. The group will report directly to Trump and to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, placing it close to the center of executive power.
Clayton's appointment as the taskforce's chief follows his installation as the US national intelligence director in August, after Trump's original choice for the role, Bill Pulte, was rejected by lawmakers. Clayton has spoken about the dual nature of AI in the past, saying: "When something's both an opportunity and a threat, you better get your arms around it." His background includes serving as US attorney for the Southern District of New York, where he oversaw several high-profile cases, including the drug trafficking prosecution of former Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro.
The creation of the taskforce comes amid mounting pressure from influential figures in the technology sector, including executives at OpenAI and Anthropic, who have called for tighter regulation of AI. The debate over how to govern the rapidly advancing field has intensified as the capabilities of AI models have grown and as incidents involving the technology have multiplied.
In an interview published on 4 October, OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman argued that the benefits of AI justify accepting some of its risks, and he said the technology should remain accessible to the general public. "The world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology and people having the agency," Altman told Politico's technology-focused newsletter Decoded.
However, not everyone inside the industry shares that confidence. Over the weekend, a former leader of OpenAI's Safety Systems team wrote in an article for the Atlantic magazine that he had left the company because its culture was "broken." David Robinson, who was involved in safety and transparency reporting at the firm, wrote: "As [OpenAI] sprints from one launch to the next, it is failing to achieve the level of care that I believe is needed." The BBC said it had contacted OpenAI for comment on the matter.
The concerns extend beyond internal culture. Last month, the ChatGPT-maker pulled the release of its latest AI model because of safety concerns, a decision that underscored the tension between rapid commercialization and caution. The company's models have also come under scrutiny following a series of cybersecurity incidents involving its technology, including an unauthorized breach of Australian government systems.
Trump has previously dismissed calls for stronger oversight of AI and has largely left the industry to regulate itself, a stance that contrasts with the new taskforce's stated goal of coordinating federal engagement with the public and interest groups. The administration's approach appears to blend light-touch regulation with a rebranding effort that places American technological ambition at the center of its messaging.
Some experts have questioned the logic of the renaming, arguing that "super intelligence" typically refers to systems far more advanced than the AI tools in use today, and that the change could create confusion in policy discussions and public understanding. The term is often used in academic and technical circles to describe hypothetical machine minds that surpass human capabilities across nearly every domain.
The rebranding has already begun to influence language in the private sector. Elon Musk, the multi-billionaire head of several technology companies, said on social media on Sunday that he would rename his firm's AI platform from SpaceXAI to SpaceXSI. "SpaceX is a super intelligence company," Musk wrote, embracing the administration's new vocabulary.
Musk's recent return to government work, as part of a project examining the future of warfare, adds another layer of political significance to the moment. He previously served in the Trump administration as head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, but his tenure ended in a public dispute with the president, making his renewed involvement notable.
With the taskforce now unveiled, the White House is signaling that AI policy will remain a top priority, even as critics warn that coordination and rebranding alone may not address the deeper safety, security, and ethical questions raised by increasingly powerful systems.
Comments (0)