He's a victim, he apologizes well, he's working with the board on this...

Is HN just this millionare-friendly? astroturfed?

Not that I expect a metaphorical lynching, but it's certainly a take when the news is "one of the most important roles in the US is potentially losing national secrets by absurd oversight".

He is a billionaire and people here fall over themselves idolizing figures like him. You get the sense reading HN comments that they respect founders they don't know more than their own spouse or kids.

What do you mean by this, should we be negative about him because he is rich?

I'm implying him being rich is making people blind to this fact.

I'm personally not interested in the morals of cheating, but claiming this is a private issue is crazy, as is removing his agency and implying it was something done to him. You don't fall in a random's bed by stumbling.

Whoa, whoa, who, whoa, whoa! You know the rules: no leaking next week’s headlines in advance. What kind of outfit do you think we’re running here?

I do agree though: regardless of whether the woman is a Chinese agent or not, and regardless of whether he knew or suspected (I doubt he did), this affair represents a serious lapse in judgement that has implications far beyond his personal life.

If you can be compromised personally, you can certainly be compromised professionally.

I suspect it won’t happen, because it would likely tank the stock, but really he should be thinking about resigning.

I did not. If there was more to it, leaked confidentials, blackmailed deals etc. then yes, he will be responsible. There is an investigation. But what is known, so far he "just" cheated on his wife. And this is what they have to deal with.

For what it's worth, I believe the military would agree, that would lead to a pretty quick loss of security clearances.

The dude isn't running a McDonalds franchise, after all. Everyone is saying he "took responsibility". No, he admitted it after it was already public (which is no great act of courage), now the board needs to actually make him accountable. And unemployed.

CEO who gets honey-trapped by stripper agent ... is well meaning smartest person ever.

Assuming the spy angle to be true, He IS a victim as a target of a concentrated effort by a nation state to compromise him.

If all it took to compromise US national security was for a nation state to exploit the oldest backdoor in the human/male psyche, then I’d say there’s something wrong with the national security defense strategy.

Don’t blame the single point of failure, blame the design, maybe the designers.

It should never have been possible.

Having said that, Russia/China wouldn’t use this strategy unless it worked against most powerful men and their psyche.

- he should’ve been more careful? How?

- he should never get into a romantic relationship because they could be a spy?

Say what you want about the Altmans who lucked into a rising tide, but Nvidia has been doing hard engineering, consistently delivered, strategically brilliantly for a few decades now.

Plus, the primary risk here isn't that secrets were exposed but rather that Huang attempts to hide the thing and makes himself vulnerable to blackmail. The facts leaking (three letter agency off the record?) nuked that possibility.

They lucked into being the available useful product when the transformer dropped. This was not some megabrain multi year preparation they had been doing.

Jensen did attempt to hide the affair. That's why it was an affair. Even now he does not mention the fact that he sold billions of dollars of chips to his girlfriend's shell company, violating export controls and creating a NatSec risk.

It was a bet that the future would need more streaming parallel compute, and GPUs were well-placed to deliver it.

That's a shrewd bet, and one AMD (and Intel) were stupid not to also make.

Clearly his wife is the victim of him cheating. And he's a victim of a foreign intelligence operation.

It doesn't even mean he deserves sympathy but I see no rational basis for saying he's not a victim of anything here.

I also see this behavior quite a lot in people that claim that meritocracy doesn’t exist in our society. But they never go far enough to end point where they admit they don’t deserve their own job.

No.

I'm suggesting that a writers emotional intelligence and personal experience can show up in their writing. Especially, when the party they're writing for is receptive of the style.

And that’s a simpler answer than Huang actually wanting a more direct apology?

I never said that. Both things can be true at the same time.

Sounding sincere doesn't mean they actually are, but it does mean they didn't let their ego get in the way of it, which is more than can be said about many who would be caught in a position like this, rich or not.

It's so depressing to see people eat this up.

Its not that Jensen is wrong, its a good play, the GP is just saying how sad it is to watch people eating this up like they think Jensen cracked open his laptop and drafted a note, pushed it up to the public web site, then forwarded it to axios or something.

There were lots of people involved in a carefully crafted rollout, the wording of which has nothing to do with how Jensen or his family are handling this. We will never know how he personally feels or how any of this really played out behind closed doors. For all we know he and his wife are talking divorce and shouting it out and this piece is just crafted damage control.

GP's take seems to assume bad faith, regardless of the message. Mu question was aimed at finding out what GP would actually consider a "genuine" response in this situation.

Many social situations have this signalling problem -- in fact I would say it's the rule, and the exception is the case where it's rational to believe another person's signals because it's known to be costly to generate them.

We have no way of knowing what he feels genuinely regardless of the words which doubtlessly were crafted by experts and approved by him. We do know his actions that caused this though. And the only real and verifiable thing will be future actions. Rest is fluff.

...just like Bill Gates and Bezos, both were found to be "foolin around" behind the backs of their spouses. A pic of a young Russian babe appears on the net with Gates. Money = power and corrupts most of us. But to Huang's credit, it likely was not he that "chased down" this Chinese spy. The Spy was the one coaxing him into an affair.

It's sort of like 1st degree versus 2nd degree. If you kill a person in cold blooded murder it is 1st degree, but if you have a good reason, or, are "lured" into the act, it's 2nd degree. I would argue for 2nd degree in this case.

Let's say there was a false apology. And a person here on HN fell for it. What exactly have they lost by falling for it? Let's say a person here on HN didn't fall for it. What exactly did they win?

People get to caught up in being right and "not being a sucker" that they forget if it's worth their time and worry. It seems people are most competitive when stakes are the lowest and there's nothing to gain.

None of us here have any stake in this.

I'm not saying crucify him. We all make mistakes. But he doesn't deserve your sadness. His family does.

He made a horrible mistake which should serve as a cautionary tale and reminder to us ... that's all.

If he was goofing around trying to juggle a bowling ball and it slipped and smashed the coffee table next to him, I could feel sorry for him. I'd still expect him to pay for the damage.

Doing stupid things with a bowling ball and cheating on your wife and family are not the same level error. I can still feel sorry for him in his mistake. And I can still expect him to pay for the damage. In this case, it isn't paying for a new coffee table. And it isn't just writing a public letter.

The levels of trust he has violated are deep. Not just for his wife and family. He has been smoozing the President of the U.S. to influence U.S. foreign policy towards China. Do we trust this was for the best interest of the U.S.? The world? So that his company could make more money? Or for his personal gratification?

I believe in second chances. I think he can work to rebuild trust. But rebuilding trust doesn't mean you start over with 100% trust. Put him back in the mail room and trust him with small things. Then trust him with increasingly important things as he earns that trust back. Maybe someday he might earn back enough trust to regain his current position. Ok, maybe don't restart him in the mail room. But don't restart him where he is.

--

All of the above is a mostly useless opinion. I am not on the board. I am not in any position to dictate anything about the situation. It is mostly none of my business. I just offer it as some food for thought for anyone trying to form their own philosophy. Consider compassion with consequences.

It's not hard to keep it zipped up in the pants.

Mr Huang was tested, and failed that test.

He was weak when he should have led.

I've said before. He doesn't deserve crucifixion, but he doesn't deserve your/a defence.

Save your words for his family.

You know, the ones that actually did the spying.

Huang had many responsibilities that he failed to live up to. Sure, he’s a victim of sorts, but he also failed everyone.

It was the Mr Huang's personal weakness that enabled the spying.

I've said before. This was a private matter, and I will not crucify him for his mistake / weakness - though it does speak somewhat to his character.

However, the spying element of this is absolutely deserving of blame. The personal weakness he's shown has enabled a national security risk. That's no small thing.

Let's pretend I took drugs and got caught. That's a personal matter.

Now let's pretend I took drugs and then ran over a family while driving. It's no longer 'just' a personal matter, despite my having zero intent to harm. But I bet you'd still, and should, blame me as my personal failing led to significant harm. Manslaughter is different to murder, but it's still blaming me for what I'd done. Rightly.

most people seem to be mad with the fact he cheated on his wife. That does not draw him as a "great guy, friend of the pc gaming community" but cheating on his wife is barely a scratch given everything else he also did.

tl;dr: gpu man put his thing into a chinese honeypot.

We can’t know what he really thinks, but as apologies go, this is a good one. And it’s not healthy to see every piece of evidences as further proof of one’s own unshakable beliefs.

When people say that the implication is they expect to see some action beyond issuing a statement.

Responsibility implies consequences and as far as I can tell there are none so far, other than minor embarrassment.

And please, no, cheating is not part of “men’s biological wiring”. Not one is “wired to cheat”. It’s a choice. A conscious choice. We have enough will power to stop ourselves at any moment regardless of whatever bullshit “wiring” theory you might have. It was his choice and he chose poorly. Simple as that.

It always astounds me how billionaires (of all people) can be the stupidest people on Earth while also being the most powerful people on Earth.

Power doesn’t corrupt, power seeks the corrupt.

On the other hand if we are partially controlled by biological drives, it explains these patterns we repeatedly observe, despite the consequences. I posit Jensen is not among "the stupidest people on earth" but that the skills that allow him to head a trillion dollar company are separate from the have-an-affair part of his biology. Of course, you could be right, maybe Bezos, Gates, Juang, Clinton, and others are just really stupid.

You seem to be conflating quite a few different subjects there. Procreation is definitely a biological drive, cheating is not. And thus, your argument is undone.

You know product ABC has ongoing yield problems from an outside source. Wait for moment when Person Z looks burnt out/stressed/etc and walk through emotional availabile "you can talk to me about anything" routine. Don't pry about specific topic but wait until Person Z volunteers some vague conflict at work you know is the yield issue and try to gently redirect conversation using your insider knowledge Person Z isn't aware you know to specific area you're interested in.

1. take responsibility (by saying you take responsibility, hopefully there is no actual fallout from this). 2. Admit wrong doing (people hate someone who tries to cover up) 3. Talk about how much you love your family and how wonderful they are and you would never want to hurt them (relatable). 4. Write in a tone of sincere regret to avoid any public backlash (stock price depends on this).

big divorce happens. gotta sell all of it. it's not cashing out before the bubble bursts, it's a "i need to do this" situation, like elon buying twitter

Meaning that if she didn't like the stitching on Jensen's leather jacket one random morning, she could divorce him, and the courts wouldn't care.

Divorce is always a risk, whether your CEO is a Papal-certified Saint, or whether he drowns puppies in his spare time.

So sure, sell now, now that the risk of divorce is slightly elevated; but be not deceived: divorce is a risk at all times, for every corporate principal, in every publicly traded company.

We also don't know what private contracts, provisions, prenuptial agreements, etc apply. It's quite likely that they have a private set of agreements, if NVDA's attorneys are at all competent.

And honestly, we are all human and all of us make mistakes. Having an affair is usually something that should be resolved privately, in your personal life, not in public. The business context of this affair is clearly something he wasn’t aware of at the time and punishing him for being deceived seems extreme.

I might evaluate someone’s good sense before investing, and this was bad decision-making, but it’s hardly the whole of his career.

But then we culturally decided divorce doesn't count. "Till death do we part" became "Till death or major or minor inconvenience do we part."

Funny things, the rules we make up to justify nonsensical behaviour.

Have you also considered the fact that you can get married without taking such an oath? A wedding ceremony is not how you get married. You get married by signing a document that says you are marrying the other person who signs the document, and then filing the document with the government. Marriage is a legal arrangement that primarily covers property rights and certain legal decisions (e.g. the presumption that your spouse can make decisions on your behalf if you are incapacitated). Even in the few remaining places where cheating has any meaningful legal significance divorce lawyers often advise clients not to bother -- it is rarely worth pursuing and most people just want to finish the divorce as quickly as possible and all filing for fault will do is raise your legal fees (for little tangible benefit).

The entire scandal is a scandal to be sure. That he cheated on his wife with an intelligence operative and whatever happened beyond that is a problem and needs to be investigated and dealt with

But this thread was about him cheating on his wife full stop. He could have cheated with anyone else and it would not have been a problem. The cheating wasn't the problem, it was who he cheated with and what happened downstream

I mean... he did lie through his teeth to make it seem better, so not exactly trustworthy no. That he didn't sell the nuclear codes doesn't mean people trusted him after that.

How is billionaire related? Its such an unoriginal complaint.

I would argue that he's not a hall pass given the coverage.

I’m not religious at all, but one of our oldest texts in modern circulation says “let he without sin cast the first stone”- we’re all guilty of something after all, and while some poeple have no moral compass at all, some people rationalise ”a little” indecency or indiscretion.

I’m not defending him, but it doesn’t tell me he is not trustworthy in totality, its just distasteful and I don’t like it and I think this behaviour is worth some social punishment.

But the knee jerk maximum-cancel for any offense is a problem. CEOs are not saints. Very few people are. If our standard for corporate leadership is not just to be good at business but also to be above reproach personally… who’s left?

It’s an unfortunate fact that humans are generally fallible and imperfect. Jack Welch cheated on his wife. Many other execs have. It sucks, but the world would not be better if there were a career death penalty for doing so.

If every C-level in the world is morally suspect, we have a bigger problem. Seriously, is your claim that being a bit iffy is a pre-requisite for the job? That's a pretty damning statement about capitalism if that's the claim.

This world view is not only more accurate, but also more forgiving, and and overall leads to a less angry world view.

This is not at all true; our standards are extremely low for moral behaviour from public figures, and they traditionally face minor or no consequences for even severely unethical or actively criminal behaviour.

You can't say we need to preach forgiveness rather than consequences when no consequences are happening at all; it reads as insincere, and is at best inaccurate.

They aren't saying "maximum cancel", they're just saying maybe this guy shouldn't be running one of the most consequential companies in the world when he's more interested in dopamine farming.

At the end of the day, asking a billionaire to resign his role, so he can sail off into the sunset on his yacht and have all the affairs he wants for the rest of his days isn't really on any scale of punishment or cancelling I'm familiar with.

Somehow we live in a world where with great power comes no responsibility or accountability, and it's quickly becoming too big of a problem to handle.

(For that matter, let's not pretend that if he resigned now he wouldn't be able to immediately pick up work again if he wanted to. Because, to reiterate, he is worth over $150 billion dollars. He could start a new company. He could start ten new companies. He could buy an island and build a secret underwater volcano lair to start a new career as a Bond villain. Assuming he doesn't have a secret underwater volcano lair already, of course.)

Nobody is saying he can't retain most/all of hi billions and do something else. But, leading a multi-billion dollar business should come with some minimum expectation of morality. If for nothing else because being an immoral turd opens you to extortion.

I really don't get the sentiment that flying around the world to cavort with a Chinese spy is ok-ish. That's insane.

"He could just leave nVidia, the company he built btw., and build another 4 trillion company before he dies."

Along with a lot of people who are not executives, and people who were not executives at the time and went on to become executives. Like it or not cheating is relatively common, our species is not strictly monogamous and the evidence can be found in male anatomy (read about it if you are interested, particularly in comparison to Chimpanzee and Gorilla anatomy).

I am not saying this as a defense of cheating; it is just a fact that people cheat on their spouses, regardless of the moral implications or how "never cool" it is.

This research is deeply suspect, theorises far beyond its data, and tends to be galloped from to the is/ought fallacy.

You are absolutely saying this as a defence of cheating, and it would be more compelling if you said that outright.

If it does, where do you draw the line? What personal moral failing deserves to be fired for and which do not?

When did we fall back to religious level purity requirements in persons personal life in order to interact / do biz with them?

If your co-worker cheats on his/her partner should they be fired from their job?

I don’t know why so many people jump so easily to canceling someone.

I will credit him the consideration that she is a state actor probably extensively trained in how to leverage men's weaknesses and fool them.

I am not supporting cheating, I am just pointing to the facts. I am poor and not famous and I would not cheat, but if I would be a billionaire or the King of America I have no idea what I would do, I am not spending a single neuron-milisecond thinking about that.

Jensen has made a lot of people an extraordinary amount of money. Fuck-up to money ratio could still be good.

Yes. The cheating is only a small part of it, although it does confirm he's a piece of trash and thereby throws into question his capability as a leader. More seriously, he potentially colluded with this person, an agent of a foreign government, to bypass export restrictions.

Honestly I don't even care about the restrictions, not my law.

Also keep in mind that divorce is not some formulaic thing. Most divorces are settled out of court and a hypothetical settlement could have terms that allow him to keep those shares in exchange for something else (e.g. maybe he agrees to pay her the cash value or agrees to a large and permanent alimony structure). I doubt the Nvidia board is worried about this issue considering the other, more immediate problems here (like the fact that his mistress is a Chinese spy).

Everyone always assumes wives are naive wilting flowers, but for all we know she has her own private life on the side. It's really none of our business.

10 minutes alone with his laptop and a well crafted malicious USB is enough.

illicit visit with a few nice gifts, all bugged.

her whole role may have been simply to isolate where is and his laptop is inside of a hotel or building so that another team can slip in and grab it or clone it.

he could have kept his mouth 100% shut and been on full opsec the whole time and still gotten played by CCP intelligence.

and at this level of the game he should fuckin know better.

That would look better, after all, we are all just human.

He's gonna fall for it again. It may just be harder for the spys to pull it off.

It might actually sustain civilized communication and behaviour, e.g a small lie to not hurt someone’s feelings.

Of course this level of deception in a marriage is worse, but it’s naive to think anyone is entirely honest.

This a known attack vectors that global security teams and front of house security teams go over yearly with C suite.

Not because he had an affair (who cares, really, and hardly uncommon), but because he had an affair that endangered the company, and in some respects our country.

Functionally, it's not different from "left an unlocked phone at a bar". A mistake anyone could make, but, when you're paid what he's paid, that type of mistake is the thing you're paid not to make.

I highly doubt that's "proven". He's handling it like a good leader so far. And by "it" I mean a mistake that literally every human on Earth could easily make. Everyone is susceptible to matters of the heart.

Huang doesn't even admit wrongdoing for the actual important part of the scandal, selling restricted hardware to an adversary!

Besides, taking responsibility is something you DO, not something you say. Stepping down would be taking responsibility, for instance.

Seriously. The letter reads like 100% insincere PR hot air. Don't fall for it.

I dont get all the Jensen glazing. "we are all human and all of us make mistakes. " . ok so what?

Yeah, but how often is a "business person" (a) clearly personally, entirely responsible for a mistake like this and (b) is a significant enough "business person" for such a public letter to even matter?

To put it another way, Huang's apologie is how someone in his position would address a situation like this. It's not very impressive to hear a CEO make a personable apology for making such a personal mistake. Like, how else would it read?

Like, it wasn't that long ago that Bill Gates' got called out for similar things and made a similar apology (https://www.wsj.com/articles/bill-gates-apologizes-to-founda...). Of course, Bill Gates isn't at the center of the world's entire economy while getting caught sleeping with a Chinese spy, so there wasn't as much scrutiny on him.

The corruption in terms of PRC GPU import policy and Huang's relationship with the US administration are important.

This is not a prurient sexual scandal, it's a major corruption and infiltration scandal in one of the most important companies in the world. Huang personal travelled with the US President and advised him on regional strategy, and gave him tens of millions of millions of dollars in gifts.

Huang can handle it correctly and be as contrite as he wants but it won't take away the geopolitical impact created by the operation.

    > My family bears no responsibility for my choices. I do. Please give them privacy.