Super Intelligence Force. The acronym has jurisdiction now.

Washington has reportedly formed the “Super Intelligence Force.” Its first assignment comes with a deadline, rather than a cape.

The Wall Street Journal reported on October 3 that Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton will chair the new group. It has 120 days to examine AI’s risks and opportunities and the federal government’s responsibilities. This is a reported formation, beyond the earlier expectation that Clayton would take an AI leadership role.^[1][3]

Investing.com’s account of the Journal’s reporting says the group will review existing laws, potential congressional action, warnings about AI-related incidents and responses using existing government powers. It also describes an aim to avoid restrictions on innovation or competition.^[2]

The useful questions are less cinematic

• Who receives a warning when something goes wrong?
• Who has authority to act on it?
• What will the public learn about the response?

A grand name is cheap, droog. A working warning system, clear responsibility and answers people can inspect take rather more effort. Let the committee earn its adjective.

Update — October 6: the acronym has jurisdiction now

Reuters reported at 4:08 p.m. EDT on October 6 that the Justice Department directed employees to use “super intelligence” and “SI” instead of AI “to the maximum extent permitted by law” in public communications, policy documents and other official records. The internal memo reviewed by Reuters says the directive extends to court filings when appropriate.^[4]

The machines didn’t become safer, more capable or more accountable. The institution’s required vocabulary changed. A White House flourish has made the familiar Washington trip from slogan to guidance to paperwork.