APresident Trump wants to erase two words from official Washington: artificial intelligence.
BAnd he says everyone else is calling it Super Intelligence. I missed that memo.
AWatcher Guru on X posted it. He wrote the U.S. will officially be, quote, "BANNING" the term "AI/Artificial Intelligence."
BThe executive order is reportedly real, signed late September. Agencies have to say SI, not AI.
AHis argument: "artificial" undersells what these systems do. Super Intelligence sounds like a comic book villain.
BIt sounds like something that should scare regulators and investors, not calm them.
AHere's the issue: superintelligence already means an AI that beats human cognition in everything. That doesn't exist yet.
BSo we're renaming the entire industry after a hypothetical. That's not branding, that's government theater.
AAnd companies now have to scrub AI from federal documents, websites, reports. That's real compliance cost.
BFor what? The chips still get bought, data centers still get built. One guy on X said rename it all you like, the orders are already paid for.
AThat was Yoda Jr. He's not wrong. But if regulators can't agree what to call it, how do they regulate it?
BMaybe that's the point. Rename it and the old rules written about AI don't apply to SI. Deregulation by dictionary.
AI don't think it's that clever. It's a president who loves branding and hates a name he didn't pick.
BEither way, if you sell AI solutions, your federal contracts just got a lot more confusing.
AAnd if you're an investor, you now have to figure out whether SI stocks are a thing. I'm not calling it that.
BWe'll keep saying artificial intelligence because that's what our listeners know. When he says SI, we translate.
AAnd by the way, the Kobeissi Letter on X also posted the same announcement, so the word is spreading.
ANext: Brazil. The Kobeissi Letter on X claims the Brazil ETF crashed almost twenty percent on Monday, an eight standard deviation move.
BEight standard deviations is the kind of event that happens once in a hundred years, if the math holds. I'd love to see the receipts.
AWe couldn't confirm it. No independent data. But it follows Brazil's presidential runoff on October twenty-fifth, so something big may have happened.
BAnd separately, Unusual Whales on X posted that Brazil's Supreme Court ordered police to confiscate the passport of Flávio Bolsonaro in a money laundering probe.
AAlso unverified. But if both are true, Brazil is having a week: the son of a former president, passport seized.
BMarkets hate uncertainty, and Brazil is delivering it by the truckload: stocks, currency, political drama.
AI'm not quoting an eight sigma number as fact. Directionally, emerging markets are selling off, and that matters for anyone with international exposure.
BWait, why are you so cautious? You'd quote a twenty percent drop from a normal exchange in a heartbeat.
ABecause the data isn't there. It's one account with a history of dramatic charts. When it's verified, we'll talk.
BFine. But this is exactly the kind of thing that moves fast. By tomorrow we'll know if it was real.
AAnd if it was, it'll be on every front page. For now, it's a claim. Moving on.
BAnd if the Brazil crash is real, the Fed will notice. Emerging markets contagion has a way of showing up in U.S. bank loan books.
ABanks could have exposure through dollar debt to Brazilian corporates. But again, no verified numbers yet.
BI'm not saying panic, I'm saying watch.
BSpeaking of AI and universities: Polymarket on X posted that a UC Berkeley math professor stopped grading for correctness because AI makes it pointless.
AThat's not independently confirmed either, and it sounds almost too perfect. Like a headline from 2023.
BBut if even math professors are giving up on detecting AI, the education model is broken.
AThe professor's logic as described: students use AI anyway, so just give credit for turning it in. That's not teaching, that's surrender.
BOr it's adapting. If a machine solves every homework problem instantly, maybe the human should learn to ask better questions.
ASo we hand out degrees for showing up? That's not adaptation, that's grade inflation with extra steps.
BThe jobs that need actual math—engineering, trading, risk—they need people who can verify the AI. Stop grading correctness and you produce people who can't catch a bad model.
AFair. And that's a workforce issue, which becomes a markets issue. But this professor's policy is still just a claim on social media.
BOne more quick one? Synthetic Alpha on X posted a prediction that by March 2027, none of the big six banks will announce a sanctioned way for an outside AI agent to move a customer's money.
AThat's a prediction, not news. But interesting because banks just spent last week building a wall against AI agents touching accounts.
BBetween October thirteen and sixteen, supposedly. I'd bet they're not against AI, they're against liability.
AIf an agent moves money and it goes wrong, who eats the loss? The bank. So no bank volunteers until regulators force them.
BThat's just reading incentives, not a bold call. But it tells you how slowly finance moves even while everyone hypes AI.
ATechnology is ready before the trust is. And that gap is where all the money is made and lost.
BNot advising anyone to bet either way. Just watching.