AI summary
- On 27 October Trump posted on Truth Social that he'll soon be "officially BANNING" the term AI in relevant documents and "everything else".
- The rule actually in force, Executive Order 14434, only covers federal agency communications and doesn't require private companies, journalists or the public to drop "AI".
- Reporting says the post didn't explain which documents, from when, or how a ban would work, and no new order has been reported.
- Adoption is uneven: Musk and Huang use SI language, while Anthropic and OpenAI still say AI.
- A promise to ban a word isn't a reason to buy a .si name, but generic .si names still make sense where the .com and .ai are taken or very expensive.
What Trump posted on 27 October
On Tuesday, President Trump went further than he has so far. In a Truth Social post reported by Gizmodo, he said he'll soon "be officially BANNING the term, 'AI/Artificial Intelligence,' in all relevant documents, and everything else, due to its inaccuracy."
The trigger seems to have been The Wall Street Journal, which still writes "artificial intelligence". Trump asked: "When will The Wall Street Journal start calling Artificial Intelligence (AI), a very bad and inaccurate name, SI (Super Intelligence), the name which virtually everyone else is using, or soon will be[?]"
That's a new word in this story. Until now the policy has been about making "SI" the standard in government. "Banning" "AI" is a much bigger claim, and if you're thinking about buying a .si name, it's worth separating what was said from what's actually in force.
What the current order actually covers
The rule in force is Executive Order 14434, signed on 29 September. According to International Business Times Singapore, it directs federal agencies to use "Super Intelligence" or "SI" instead of "Artificial Intelligence" or "AI" in official communications, to the extent permitted by law. It covers executive-branch correspondence, public communications, websites, reports and other non-statutory documents.
It doesn't require private companies, researchers, journalists or the public to drop the term. It also leaves old paperwork alone. Section 2(b) says: "Nothing in this section requires the alteration of previously issued regulations, Presidential actions, contracts, grants, or other historical documents."
A Japanese explainer on note sets out the split clearly. Federal statutes still say AI. Federal agency announcements and reports have said SI since 29 September. Existing federal rules and contracts stay AI, state laws stay AI, and companies decide for themselves. It cites an IAPP article saying organisations will need to handle both terms.
Why a "ban" is harder than it sounds
Gizmodo points out that banning a word, as opposed to making another word standard by executive order, suggests Trump would have to bolster the September order with some kind of enforcement mechanism. It also notes he can't legally require journalists to use the phrase.
The note piece goes further. The post doesn't say which documents are covered, from when, or how the "ban" would apply, and reporting hasn't mentioned a new order or implementation steps. From the post alone, you can't tell whether it widens the scope or just restates September's order.
IBTimes adds that the administration hasn't clearly explained how it would compel private businesses, news organisations or researchers to follow suit. It also notes that some reports have cited a YouGov poll suggesting 53% of Americans prefer the original term.
Who's saying SI, and who isn't
Adoption is real but patchy. IBTimes reports that Elon Musk renamed SpaceXAI to SpaceX Super Intelligence, Nvidia's Jensen Huang has described data centres as "super intelligence factories", and Marc Benioff and Satya Nadella have used the phrase. But Anthropic and OpenAI continue to use "AI" in their communications and technical work.
Even supporters slip. Gizmodo notes that on Sunday Musk used "AI" in the phrase "AI data centers" in an X post, and that Sam Altman doesn't appear to have acknowledged the two-word version at all. IBTimes' verdict is that SI is official policy for covered federal communications but hasn't become the industry standard.
The date that matters more than the post
If you want something concrete to watch, it isn't a Truth Social post. Military.com reports that the order defines the new term using Congress's existing AI definition and gives the president's science adviser 60 days to propose legislative changes. The note explainer works out that this deadline falls in late November, and says the next thing to check is whether that proposed wording changes the SI definition from the AI one.
There's also an international angle. The note piece reports that the Treasury says it's negotiating SI adoption with other IMF members, and that Treasury official Erin Browne has said the US, as G20 chair, wants to spread the change internationally and calls it a clear priority. That's worth watching too, but it's a negotiation, not a result.
Should you buy a .si name because of this?
Not because of this post, no. A promise to ban a word isn't a ban, and the order that exists doesn't touch private companies at all. I'd be wary of anyone telling you this changes the value of .si names overnight. Most .si names are speculation, and the aftermarket is small. If the .com you want is available at a sensible price, buy the .com.
What the post does show is that the AI and SI split isn't going away soon. Federal agencies say SI, the law and most of the industry still say AI, and you'll see both for a while. That's why I think plain generic names with "AI" in them still work on .si: they read correctly whichever word wins. A few from my inventory where the alternatives are pricey:
- aimarket.si, $4,500. The .com is listed at $594,888 and the .ai at $47,995.
- aiprompts.si, $5,500. 201,000 searches a month worldwide, the .ai is listed at $44,500 and the .com has been held since 2018.
- greatmind.si, $2,000. The .com is listed at $500,000 and there are 33,100 searches a month.
- futurehuman.si, $1,500. The .ai is listed at $290,000 and there are 5,400 searches a month.
Before you buy any .si name, run the three-question test:
- Is the .com and the .ai taken or expensive? If either is affordable, that's usually the better buy.
- Is it a generic name, not a brand? Plain words only. Don't buy a copy of one company's name, such as anything built on SpaceX.
- Do people search for it? Real search volume means the name describes something people already want.
If a name passes all three, a .si can be a sensible, low-cost choice. If it doesn't, no presidential post will fix that.
Names from this store that pass the test
Questions
Has Trump actually banned the term AI?
No. On 27 October he posted that he'll soon be "officially BANNING" the term, but the order in force, Executive Order 14434, only directs federal agencies to use SI in official communications to the extent permitted by law. It doesn't require private companies, researchers, journalists or the public to stop saying AI.
Does the order change existing contracts or regulations?
No. Section 2(b) says: "Nothing in this section requires the alteration of previously issued regulations, Presidential actions, contracts, grants, or other historical documents."
Are tech companies using SI now?
Some are. Elon Musk renamed SpaceXAI to SpaceX Super Intelligence and Jensen Huang has called data centres "super intelligence factories", but Anthropic and OpenAI continue to use AI in their communications and technical work.
What's the next date to watch?
The order gives the president's science adviser 60 days to propose legislative changes, and that deadline falls in late November. The key question is whether the proposed wording changes the SI definition from the existing AI one.
Sources
- Gizmodo, 2026-10-27
- International Business Times Singapore, 2026-10-28
- note, 2026-10-27
- Military.com, 2026-10-28
This post was researched and drafted with AI help from the sources above, then checked by me before publishing. Facts are as reported on the dates shown.