Hi everyone,
I’ve been thinking about the recent shift in tech terminology (especially after the US Executive Order rebranding AI to “SI” - Super Intelligence). It feels like we are inflating a massive sci-fi hype bubble by calling statistical LLMs a “Super-Mind”.
If we apply the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) rules for physical markets, a clear legal contradiction emerges:
- The Diamond Analogy: Lab-grown diamonds are visually and chemically identical to natural ones, but the FTC forces companies to label them as Synthetic. They can’t call them “Super Diamonds”.
- The LLM Reality: Current models are manufactured inside server farms using human-created data as raw carbon input. They are industrial-grade tools of synthesis, not sentient beings.
Therefore, “SI” should stand for Synthetic Intelligence (or Imitation Intelligence). It strips away the digital mysticism while acknowledging the immense power of the tool.
Interestingly, for non-English markets, this shift can be invisible. For instance, in the Cyrillic space, the deeply entrenched acronym ИИ (Artificial Intelligence) can be elegantly redefined as Имитация Интеллекта (Imitation of Intelligence) without changing a single letter on government portals, yet completely shifting the regulatory and psychological framework.
What do you think? Does the “Super Intelligence” branding create a dangerous expectation gap? Would shifting to “Synthetic” or “Imitation” help build more stable, safe, and realistic legal frameworks for AI deployment?
*Inspired by the full essay on [Realidad Aislada](Why Trump’s "SI" Should Mean Synthetic, Not Super: Lessons from the FTC Diamond Rules).*