President Donald Trump announced a new federal task force led by senior intelligence, technology, regulatory and personnel officials to coordinate U.S. policy on advanced computing systems as his administration formally replaces the government’s use of “artificial intelligence” with “super intelligence.”
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump announced Sunday the creation of a Super Intelligence Force charged with coordinating federal policy on rapidly advancing computing technology, placing senior officials from the intelligence community, Pentagon, Federal Trade Commission and federal workforce system at the center of the administration’s effort to maintain U.S. technological leadership.
Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton will help lead the new group alongside Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson, Pentagon Chief Technology Officer Emil Michael and Office of Personnel Management Director Scott Kupor. The officials will report to Trump and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles.
The task force is expected to coordinate federal engagement with technology companies, consumers, public-interest organizations, religious groups, critical-infrastructure operators and other stakeholders as increasingly capable systems raise questions involving national security, economic competition, safety and government oversight.
“The Super Intelligence Force is tasked with coordinating the effort of the Federal Government to ensure that America continues to lead the World in Super Intelligence, which many say is bigger than the Industrial Revolution, and the Internet, and will protect the interests, and improve the lives, of all Americans,” Trump wrote in announcing the group.
The new organization follows a series of administration actions that have rapidly reshaped federal policy toward the technology.
Five days earlier, Trump signed a Sept. 29 executive order instructing executive agencies to replace the terms “artificial intelligence” and “AI” with “super intelligence” and “SI” in official correspondence, websites, reports, policy documents, public communications and other nonstatutory executive-branch materials.
The order does not require agencies to rewrite previously issued regulations, presidential actions, government contracts, grants or historical documents.
For purposes of implementing the directive, the administration is temporarily applying the existing federal legal definition of artificial intelligence to the newly adopted term “super intelligence.”
Trump also directed the assistant to the president for science and technology to develop proposed legislative language within 60 days establishing a federal definition of Super Intelligence and SI, evaluate whether existing laws should be changed and recommend any additional executive actions needed to implement the policy.
The White House described the order as the beginning of what it called an era of Super Intelligence, arguing that the new terminology more accurately reflects the capabilities and potential of increasingly sophisticated computing systems.
The creation of the Super Intelligence Force also follows a Sept. 29 White House meeting involving Trump and executives from some of the most prominent technology companies in the world.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, OpenAI President Greg Brockman, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang were among those participating.
Following the meeting, Trump and technology leaders announced a voluntary safety agreement intended to establish common practices for developing increasingly capable systems. The companies agreed to implement internal safeguards, permit external auditing and evaluation and establish independent board-level review of audit findings.
Participating companies also agreed to meet regularly, exchange safety practices and work toward shared standards.
The agreement is voluntary rather than a federal regulation and contains no statutory penalties for companies that fail to comply.
Trump has generally advocated industry self-regulation instead of a large new federal regulatory structure, arguing that technology companies have substantial incentives to ensure their systems operate safely while law enforcement can respond to deliberate wrongdoing or criminal activity.
The administration has simultaneously stressed that excessive regulation could weaken the United States in its technological competition with China.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has similarly opposed calls for a broad moratorium on advanced system development, arguing that freezing American progress could allow China to gain a strategic advantage.
The White House accord nevertheless represents an acknowledgment by both government and industry that rapidly improving systems create risks requiring safeguards.
Zuckerberg characterized the voluntary agreement as a starting point for broader cooperation among companies on safety.
Amodei has taken a more cautious position, repeatedly warning that increasingly powerful systems could pose severe risks if their capabilities advance faster than safeguards. He has urged technology companies to consider slowing certain improvements while stronger protections are developed.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has also raised concerns about potentially catastrophic risks.
Altman announced in September that OpenAI would not pursue an initial public offering in 2026 while the company concentrates on safety issues surrounding advanced systems. He questioned how precise predictions about the probability of technology causing human extinction can realistically be calculated but said the potential consequences are serious enough that companies and governments should respond responsibly.
Altman has also suggested that leading technology developers may be moving closer to an agreement under which competitors would cooperate on safety and potentially slow development under certain circumstances rather than engaging in an unrestricted technological race.
The emerging debate has produced unusual political alliances.
Some technology executives support stronger safeguards or slower development, while others warn that government restrictions could leave American companies behind international competitors.
Members of Congress are similarly divided over whether voluntary commitments provide sufficient protection.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, have introduced legislation that would establish a new federal regulatory structure and halt certain advanced development until mandatory safeguards are created.
Their proposal, the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, would establish a federal regulator, impose mandatory testing and oversight and prohibit development of systems meeting its definition of uncontrolled artificial superintelligence.
Casar sharply criticized the administration’s voluntary industry agreement in an Oct. 3 post on X.
“This week, the most powerful AI companies on Earth signed a pledge with Trump to regulate themselves,” Casar said. “It’s one page. It’s voluntary. It has no penalties. @SenSanders and I have a bill that is binding, to put a real watchdog on AI. Not a pinky promise.”
Sanders has also said he intends to bring technology-safety experts to Capitol Hill to brief lawmakers from both parties about possible risks associated with increasingly capable systems.
The disagreement reflects a larger question surrounding the technology: whether government should impose binding rules before the most advanced systems are developed or allow companies to move rapidly while voluntarily establishing safeguards.
Trump has largely come down on the side of continued development.
His administration is treating technological leadership as an economic and national-security priority, arguing that the United States cannot afford to allow China or another rival to dominate a technology that could reshape military systems, scientific research, manufacturing, medicine, communications and the broader economy.
The Super Intelligence Force is intended to provide centralized federal coordination as those issues increasingly overlap.
Clayton brings the intelligence community into that effort at a time when advanced computing systems are becoming increasingly important to cybersecurity, surveillance, foreign intelligence analysis and potential biological or military threats.
Ferguson’s participation brings the Federal Trade Commission into the group as policymakers consider competition, consumer protection and business practices involving technology companies.
Michael represents the Pentagon’s role in deploying emerging technologies for national defense, while Kupor’s involvement brings in the Office of Personnel Management as the federal government evaluates how automation could change its workforce and how agencies recruit employees with advanced technical expertise.
Trump said the task force will not operate solely within government. It is expected to consult technology developers, infrastructure providers and members of the public as the administration determines how to promote innovation while responding to safety concerns.
The effort also comes amid enormous investment in the physical infrastructure required to operate increasingly powerful systems.
Technology companies are spending heavily on data centers, electricity generation, semiconductors and computing equipment. Those investments have also generated local political resistance over electricity prices, water consumption, land use and the amount of infrastructure required to support large computing campuses.
Trump has strongly defended continued data-center construction, arguing that the United States must maintain sufficient computing capacity to compete with China.
The administration’s terminology shift has begun influencing the private sector as well.
Musk said Sunday that he plans to rename SpaceX’s technology operation from SpaceXAI to SpaceXSI following Trump’s adoption of “super intelligence” as the government’s preferred terminology.
The move came after an X user asked Musk whether the operation would adopt the SI designation.
“Yes, we will make that change,” Musk replied.
Trump’s terminology order does not alter the underlying statutory definition currently governing the technology. Congress would have to enact legislation if lawmakers decide to formally change terminology embedded in federal law.
The administration has therefore begun with language used within the executive branch while giving its science and technology adviser 60 days to recommend how a broader legal definition should work.
That process will unfold alongside the work of the newly announced Super Intelligence Force.
The task force gives the White House a central body for coordinating an area previously divided among agencies responsible for intelligence, defense, consumer protection, federal employment, scientific research and other functions.
Its creation also places Trump directly in the middle of the growing dispute between advocates of rapid technological advancement and those warning that developers may be approaching capabilities requiring stronger government safeguards.
The administration’s approach attempts to pursue both goals: keeping development moving while encouraging companies to police their systems through voluntary standards and federal coordination.
Critics such as Sanders and Casar argue voluntary promises are insufficient. Technology executives themselves remain divided over how rapidly the most advanced systems should progress.
Trump, meanwhile, is framing the issue primarily as a competition for global leadership.
With the Super Intelligence Force, the president is now putting a formal federal coordinating structure behind that effort while simultaneously changing the language the executive branch uses to describe the technology itself.
Original article
Comments