October 26, 2026
October 26, 2026
The White House says stop calling it AI. Here’s what matters more.
The White House says stop calling it AI. Here’s what matters more.
The White House says stop calling it AI. Here’s what matters more.
By Paul Soliman, CEO, BYC Ventures
By Paul Soliman, CEO, BYC Ventures
Last month, the United States government stopped using artificial intelligence. An executive order now tells federal agencies to call it "super intelligence," or SI. The President's argument was that the word "artificial" makes the technology sound fake.
I understand the instinct. I have spent years building systems most people only meet as headlines, and names shape how people feel about what we build. A new name, however, does not change what a system stands on.
Every one of these systems answers from the records we give it. Feed it records no one can check, and you get confident answers no one can check either.
The more interesting news came the same day. The leaders of six of the world's largest AI companies signed what the White House calls an accord on super intelligence. Each company commits to internal controls and brings in an independent external auditor to check whether those controls work. A committee of its board then reviews the findings. The President called it morally binding.
Critics say the details are thin, and they have a point. Look at where the accord lands, though. When the most powerful technology companies on earth had to show the public they could be held to account, they reached for the audit.
An audit is only as good as the records it reads. The auditor will ask what a system was given, what it decided and whether anything changed along the way. Data answers every one of those questions. If that data can be quietly edited, the audit becomes a performance.
A name tells you what a system hopes to be. A record tells you what it actually did.
This is the problem my team at BYC Ventures works on, and we work on it from the Philippines. Through the DBM Blockchain Project, the ₱6.793 trillion 2026 General Appropriations Act sits on a public blockchain, where its records can be independently verified. Through Katibayan, which began in Baguio City, public records become verifiable from the moment they are created.
We started these projects before AI reached most offices. Today, any system that reads those records reads something anyone can check. That is the ground I want Filipino institutions standing on before the agents arrive.
I say this as a Filipino builder. The countries that name this technology do not get to be the only ones who decide how it is held to account. A Filipino team has already put a national budget on a public chain, and we can build the ground floor of this era here.
What this means if you lead an institution
If you run an agency, a bank or a growing business, your most important AI decision is about your records. Ask whether you can show what your systems were given, and whether someone outside your organization can check it. If the answer is no, start there, before an agent starts acting on your behalf.
The new name will change how the world talks about this technology. Clear ground will decide whether the world can rely on it. Every critical decision, made by a person or by a system, should start there.
Share this article:
Last month, the United States government stopped using artificial intelligence. An executive order now tells federal agencies to call it "super intelligence," or SI. The President's argument was that the word "artificial" makes the technology sound fake.
I understand the instinct. I have spent years building systems most people only meet as headlines, and names shape how people feel about what we build. A new name, however, does not change what a system stands on.
Every one of these systems answers from the records we give it. Feed it records no one can check, and you get confident answers no one can check either.
The more interesting news came the same day. The leaders of six of the world's largest AI companies signed what the White House calls an accord on super intelligence. Each company commits to internal controls and brings in an independent external auditor to check whether those controls work. A committee of its board then reviews the findings. The President called it morally binding.
Critics say the details are thin, and they have a point. Look at where the accord lands, though. When the most powerful technology companies on earth had to show the public they could be held to account, they reached for the audit.
An audit is only as good as the records it reads. The auditor will ask what a system was given, what it decided and whether anything changed along the way. Data answers every one of those questions. If that data can be quietly edited, the audit becomes a performance.
A name tells you what a system hopes to be. A record tells you what it actually did.
This is the problem my team at BYC Ventures works on, and we work on it from the Philippines. Through the DBM Blockchain Project, the ₱6.793 trillion 2026 General Appropriations Act sits on a public blockchain, where its records can be independently verified. Through Katibayan, which began in Baguio City, public records become verifiable from the moment they are created.
We started these projects before AI reached most offices. Today, any system that reads those records reads something anyone can check. That is the ground I want Filipino institutions standing on before the agents arrive.
I say this as a Filipino builder. The countries that name this technology do not get to be the only ones who decide how it is held to account. A Filipino team has already put a national budget on a public chain, and we can build the ground floor of this era here.
What this means if you lead an institution
If you run an agency, a bank or a growing business, your most important AI decision is about your records. Ask whether you can show what your systems were given, and whether someone outside your organization can check it. If the answer is no, start there, before an agent starts acting on your behalf.
The new name will change how the world talks about this technology. Clear ground will decide whether the world can rely on it. Every critical decision, made by a person or by a system, should start there.
Share this article:
