names

Intelligence(s) rebranded

/ TT / Leave a comment

Should tech labels depend on consensus or decree?

On 29 September 2026 Donald Trump issued an executive order directing US federal agencies to use Super Intelligence in place of Artificial Intelligence, defining the new term to cover the same technologies as the old one and calling those who refused to comply “THE ENEMY”. Since its first use in this context in 1955 the more familiar term has been in and out of fashion, surviving two ‘AI winters’ when both concept and name were out of favour among specialists. Its power today derives from its endorsement by all the major stakeholders: tech bros, broligarchs, government, commerce and media, hence also the general public. The English term has been translated directly into other major languages. I spoke to tech journalist Chris Stokel-Walker about the issues surrounding the attempted rebranding.

Chris’s article for Fast Company is here…

https://www.fastcompany.com/91621442/its-not-ai-and-its-not-superintelligence-so-what-is-it

Before the article appeared, I had asked AI engines Chat GPT and Google Gemini which of the two terms they preferred. These were their responses in their own words…

“I would choose AI, rather than SI, but the distinction is more interesting than it might at first appear. There are really two questions here: which term is more useful, and what assumptions each term encourages us to make about the technology. ‘AI’ or Artificial Intelligence is the established, relatively neutral term. It describes a broad field of technologies, from relatively simple pattern-recognition systems to sophisticated language models such as myself. It makes no necessary claim that a system is conscious, wise, autonomous or superior to human beings. ‘SI’ – Superintelligence – is a much stronger term. It suggests intelligence that surpasses human capabilities, perhaps across most or all intellectual domains. It is not simply another name for AI; it describes a hypothetical or prospective level of capability. Using it can therefore make a prediction about the future sound like a description of an existing reality.”

“If you are looking at the natural stepping stones of computer science, the missing link between today’s regular AI and actual Super Intelligence (SI / ASI) is AGI (Artificial General Intelligence). AI: Narrow systems designed for specific tasks (like ChatGPT or AlphaFold). AGI: A hypothetical machine that possesses human-level reasoning, learning, and adaptability across any domain while SI here implies an intellect that drastically surpasses human capabilities in every cognitive field. An alternative might be Synthetic Intelligence (SI). Interestingly, before “SI” was adopted by the U.S. government to mean “Super Intelligence”, the abbreviation SI already stood for Synthetic Intelligence in tech circles. If you want a third term that avoids the baggage of “artificiality,” you can look at Cognitive Computing: Systems that mimic the human brain’s thought processes using pattern recognition and natural language processing. This can subsume Embodied Cognition / Embodied AI: AI that interacts physically with the real world through sensors and robotics to learn like a human child, rather than just reading data on a screen.  If you are looking at the broader philosophical “pillars of intelligence,” the ultimate third alternative is NI (Natural / Biological Intelligence). This represents human and animal cognition—the benchmark that AI attempts to mimic and SI aims to surpass.”

NAMED AND SHAMED

/ TT / 1 Comment

When proper names become slurs – and Karen, Ben and Chad can rest assured, it’s nothing new

I spoke last week to Ellie Muir of the Independent about the way in which certain given names have recently been appropriated in popular culture and the media for use as labels, catch-all stereotypes – or slurs. One focus of Ellie’s piece is the use of the name Karen on social media and as a meme to evoke an over-assertive, unreasonably demanding or hypercritical white woman (memorably epitomised as ‘an antivaxxer soccer mom with speak-to-the-manager hair’). Karen is a Danish version of Katherine dating from the Middle Ages and adopted by English speakers from the 1940s. Originally a Black US nickname for a stereotypical white woman perceived as overbearing and entitled, Karen was most popular as a baby name in 1965 in the US, so would typically denote a Generation X female, it went viral in 2017.

Ellie’s article is here…

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/ben-stage-karen-meme-b2284528.html

In the USA in the early 80s Valley Girls and college students used to refer to their sporty, macho ‘jock’ contemporaries as biftads, inspired by the fact that many of them were nicknamed ‘Biff’ or ‘Tad’. Much more recently the online incel community of frustrated, embittered, uncharismatic males has used Chad to denote a successful alpha male who is popular with women (his black counterpart would be Tyrone).

In the UK names like Sharon, Tracy and Mandy were earlier employed to evoke stereotypical working class, vulgar females or chavs (notably in the sitcom Birds of a Feather and in Viz comic), while from the 70s through to the early 90s, Rupert, Tarquin and Nigel were used to mock supposed toffs or ‘posho’ males and are sometimes still heard today. Kevins or Kevs were uncouth, uncultured young British males from the end of the 70s until the end of the 90s, causing much amusement when the same name became cool and fashionable in the US and France in the 80s. Wayne was used in the same way. Around the same time London youths looking for dates referred to girls as Becks (this was pre ‘Posh and Becks’ as nicknames of a Spice Girl and her footballer escort by the way) because so many North London Jewish girls were called Rebecca or Becky. In the mid-2000s teenage girls thought to be too earnest, awkward or just unpopular were dismissed as Megs, the name possibly inspired by the daughter of the same name in the TV animated comedy Family Guy. Some older London males nicknamed middle-aged females, especially if deemed to be frumpish or charmless, Noras or Dorises.

A footnote: in June 2025 a UK judge confirmed what we all knew. ‘Karen’ can be pejorative…

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jun/28/calling-someone-a-karen-is-borderline-racist-sexist-and-ageist-tribunal-says

Name Analysis and Ethnic Profiling

/ TT / Leave a comment

 

Image result for profiling

 

I talked to Zoë Henry of Inc. magazine about reports that profilers in the USA can now pinpoint ethnic identities from individuals’ names. Zoë’s article is here:

http://www.inc.com/zoe-henry/companies-using-software-to-predict-customers-ethnicities.html

I’m sure these experts are scrupulous in not doing anything illegal but I think, in the case of hyperindividualised and hyperlocalised profiling, the subjects (who presumably don’t know they have been identified) will probably feel comfortable about it if their names have been retrieved from lists they have subscribed to, possibly less so if they have been traced from other sources like electoral rolls, phone directories, library memberships.

In marketing there’s the assumption that a member of a group will conform to a stereotype of that group’s consumer behaviour – an assumption that is potentially patronising if not controversial. And when we look in close-up at actual instances, what precisely can we predict about, say, LeKeysha LLoyd Muhammad’s buying patterns and preferences? Especially if they are trans and have an address in rural Idaho?

Ethnic name profiling of course has a potentially bad reputation when used by government or law enforcement or by employers* in covertly vetting prospective hirings. As US human rights lawyer Bill Quigley commented:

‘One of the draconian consequences of 9/11 is racial profiling. Bollywood Muslim actor Shah Rukh Khan became the latest victim of what some call “flying while a Muslim” after he was singled out by US airport authorities allegedly because of his Muslim surname “Khan”. “I was really hassled at the American airport because my name is Khan,” he said. The other recent Indian victim was former president of India. On April 24, 2009 in a clear violation of protocol, Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, a Muslim, was frisked by the staff of American airliner Continental Airlines.’

 

*an article on that subject:

Stereotyped ethnic names as a barrier to workplace entry