# Trump's Vow to Ban 'Artificial Intelligence' Draws Criticism as One User Says 'What a F**king Idiot' > Source: > Published: 2026-10-28 01:10:28+00:00 # Trump's Vow to Ban 'Artificial Intelligence' Draws Criticism as One User Says 'What a F**king Idiot' ## Critics question the cost and purpose of changing official terminology, and whether a presidential directive can reshape everyday language Donald Trump's vow to ban the term '[artificial intelligence](https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/trump-replace-artificial-intelligence-super-intelligence-1828284)' drew criticism from social media users, with one commenter, JoJoFromJerz, responding: 'What a f**king idiot'. The US president proposed using 'super intelligence' instead, announcing an intended change in terminology rather than a ban on the technology itself. Trump said the restriction would cover 'all relevant documents, and everything else, due to its inaccuracy', without explaining the full reach of that wording. The announcement prompted questions about its practical purpose, the potential expense of revising materials and whether people would adopt his preferred name. ## Trump's AI Priorities Questioned Some commenters contrasted the proposed terminology change with household pressures, questioning why renaming the technology should receive presidential attention. 'That will help gas and grocery prices,' wrote X user @teetime234, while @BigJohn826 said: 'We have no healthcare plan to offer you, but we can rename things.' Trump justified the proposed change by calling 'artificial intelligence' a 'very bad and inaccurate name', arguing that 'virtually everyone else' was using 'super intelligence', 'or soon will be'. His statement concerned what the technology should be called, rather than a prohibition on developing or using AI. ## Federal Rebrand Already Ordered Trump signed an executive order on 29 September directing executive departments and agencies to replace 'artificial intelligence' and 'AI' with 'super intelligence' and 'SI', to the maximum extent permitted by law. It covers official correspondence, public communications, websites, reports, policy documents and other non-statutory documents within the executive branch. The order does not require previously issued regulations, presidential actions, contracts, grants or historical documents to be rewritten. Those exceptions provide important context for questions about the potential expense of replacing existing materials. ## Scope of AI Term Ban Remains Unclear For the order's purposes, 'super intelligence' initially covers the same technologies and systems included in the existing statutory definition of artificial intelligence. It also gives the president's science and technology adviser 60 days to submit proposed legislative language establishing a federal definition and recommending further changes. That instruction establishes a [federal terminology policy](https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/trump-super-intelligence-force-us-ai-policy-1823584), but does not impose a general prohibition on the public using 'artificial intelligence'. Trump's reference to 'everything else' in his latest post leaves questions about whether he intends additional restrictions beyond the settings identified in the order. ## Social Media Users Raise Cost Concerns One commenter, @CinnamonWSpice, questioned the potential expense of changing government materials and asked what the proposal might mean for [textbooks, universities and books](https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/melania-trump-super-intelligence-challenge-2027-1825648). Those questions do not establish an actual cost or demonstrate that educational publications would have to adopt the replacement wording. The healthcare and grocery-price comments similarly expressed objections to Trump's priorities, rather than establishing the proposal's economic effects or facts about healthcare policy. Their criticism centred on whether changing terminology would address concerns they considered more pressing. ## Trump's Rebrand Draws Twitter Comparisons Other users questioned whether an official preference could change everyday vocabulary, comparing the proposal with people continuing to call X by its former name. 'People still call this place Twitter,' wrote @kapalm728, while @zsid2026 said: 'We are still saying Twitter so ....' Another commenter, @pammyjams73, questioned Trump's influence over public language, writing: 'He wishes he had this much control.' The proposed replacement also attracted jokes, with @Dana45258763 saying: 'Surprised he hasn't named it after himself.' © Copyright IBTimes 2026. All rights reserved.