No, you should be negative about him because he's exposing an industry to sexual blackmail and espionage in a position way too high to not know better.

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

He had an affair(into which he was lured by someone professional) and accepted his fault and responsibility. He did not poison people for profit and tried to hide it, so personally I see this more as a internal family issue for him and not so much the worlds buisness.

If he had stored an important password on a postit on his laptop, would you call that a private matter?

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.

"Oops, I tripped and somehow my penis ended up inside them."

> If he had stored an important password on a postit on his laptop, would you call that a private matter?

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.

True, you get seduced. You think Russian and Chinese spy agencies leave these things to chance?

While I agree with the top level in this thread that it _is_ refreshing to see someone like Jensen taking responsibility for once, I disagree that we should absolve him of all wrong doings. This is also not just a personal matter. If this person was indeed a Chinese spy (I believe this is still not confirmed), then that can have big impact on NVDA. Naturally, it may also not have any impact, but regardless, if it is the former, it certainly is not an internal family issue.

"I disagree that we should absolve him of all wrong doings"

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.

Whether it happened or not I don't think is relevant, the lack of judgment in opening himself to blackmail, etc., was a lapse in judgment that at least IMHO disqualifies him from leading one of the most valuable and strategically important companies on the planet.

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.

I'm not sure why we should give a fuck unless she was a spy or whatever.

Based on HN, a programmer who used company laptop for interview is total irresponsible unprofessional looser, no one should hire him. Whoever says something else is heavily downvoted.

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

Very apt and timely comparison.

I think this is the wrong take. Being rich doesn’t suddenly reduce people’s humanity.

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.

I see a lot of comments like this, but I’m not sure people thinks he should’ve done. He cheated on his wife, that’s a bad thing. But let’s say he was single and got into bed with a spy, the situation wouldn’t be any better for I’m. So, what’s the actual criticism?

- he should’ve been more careful? How?

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

The implication is that HN commenters have a tendency to attribute more humanity and depth to rich and powerful figures

In general, yes.