Someone else stepping up or stepping in has things to do.

certainly sounds like that's the case, yup

And I'm pretty sure Jenson resigning without a suitable, almost identical successor will kill NVIDIA, the way Intel and AMD and IBM became mere husks of what they were, with no possible road to another western replacement in sight.

It's odd that you seem to consider two /entirely opposed/ hypotheses as being similar to one another. Superficially, "I'm fairly convinced [this is an intel op of some kind]" makes the two seem similar, but each comes with an implicit set of consequences, right? So it's really "I'm fairly convinced [this is supposed to be really advantageous to the west because of these suspected consequences for the west] or that it's [really harmful to the west because of these other suspected consequences]". It seems odd to suspect two highly opposed set of consequences as both being reasonably likely and thus admitting to two diametrically opposed motivations for the same act.

Nvidia is incredibly valuable, in large part due to Jenson.

The US is aligned with Nvidia, but it does not have total control and so is largely beholden to its choices. Amung other things, the US is paranoid about the resource ever aligning with China (thus export controls). Jenson may refuse to cede more control.

China is misaligned with Nvidia, due to competition with the US. It will never have any control, and thus wants it removed from alignment with the US to mitigate their advantage.

Both superpowers have vast intelligence networks with a long history of causing untold human suffering in pursuit of their short-term, often meaningless goals.

Suddenly, Jenson is under attack from all angles over something relatively unrelated and meaningless to Nvidia - certainly disproportional to his role as arguably one of the most important people on the planet. Within a day, with no actual information of what happened, major media companies are calling for Jenson to be removed from his position.

This could benefit the US government, who can now get a replacement more amenable to, say, the surveillance state or more ideologically opposed to China. Destruction of Nvidia be damned, the CIA hasn't though more than 2 years ahead since the 60s.

This could benefit China, as this could cause a rapid decline in Nvidia's progress and therefore the West's ability to continue beating China - in particularly since there seems to be no one capable of filling the gap if it were to happen.

> And I'm pretty sure Jenson resigning without a suitable, almost identical successor will kill NVIDIA

Maybe, but Nvidia bears responsibility for having such poorly de-risked corporate governance. It's actually shocking that the company propping up the entire AI industry (and thus the US economy) is led by a CEO with no COO and dozens of direct reports. Jensen thought he was invincible because he positioned himself to have total control of the company operations, which certainly didn't encourage him to think twice about making the mistakes he did. He acted out because he felt empowered to, and it's easy why.

My argument isn't that Jensen didn't do it - I have no doubt he had multiple affairs. He already admitted to the first one!

My argument is that the President of the United States raped children and nobody even talks about it anymore. So Jensen fucking consenting 50 year-olds and suddenly having the CIA outing him (after knowing about it for a year apparently), and every major media company calling for his resignation over it, before any actual investigations finish and over something seemingly neither illegal or particularly related to his work is weird.

> Occam's razor.

In light of the above, I would say Occam's razor is someone is trying to get rid of Jensen.

Reporting by both NYT and WSJ has said there have been two opposing factions in the White House on China/AI policy since Trump was elected. The Model Hawks want to Keep America Strong by slowing China's progress in advanced AI models. They think the best way to do that is by stopping US advanced AI hardware going to China (as much as we can).

The Hardware Hawks wants to Keep America Strong by slowing the development of AI's homegrown advanced AI hardware industry. They think the best way to do that is by ONLY selling US advanced AI hardware to China that's slightly more powerful than what China could make on their own now.

Trump vacillates between the two factions (sometimes daily), as indicated by banning the sale of certain somewhat advanced chips, then later reversing that ban. The argument to reverse the ban was because before any ban NVidia had >90% of China's domestic market and after a couple years of ban was down to ~50%, with the difference funding the development of China's AI hardware industry.

I think both factions actually have valid points and don't know which would be better. However, to your point about the reason for these leaks of >6 month-old intelligence reports now - it's that Jensen (and NVidia) have always been in the Keep America Strong by slowing China's domestic hardware industry. If China's domestic AI hardware companies are Mice, NVidia is the Cat saying, "I was keeping your mouse problem under 10% until you locked me out and now it's 50%" Let me back in and I'll get it under control again.

Jensen has developed a pretty good relationship with Trump and is able to sometimes sway his opinion. Whether this is good or bad depends on which kind of Hawk you are. For example, Jensen was invited to go on Trump's first China trip and the Model Hawks were not happy. On Trump's second trip, the Model Hawks managed to keep Jensen from being invited and the Hardware Hawks were not happy. Air Force One left Washington without Jensen, but then stopped in Alaska and picked up Jensen - which made the Model Hawks crazy. The Model Hawks made sure the intelligence report about Alice being a suspected asset for Chinese intelligence was included in briefing report sent to Trump back in May. But Trump it didn't get Trump to stop listening to Jensen sometimes (Trump today claimed he "doesn't remember seeing it, or if he did see it, it didn't make a big impression on him").

So who benefits by these old reports about Alice from May leaking now and blowing up all over the news? BTW, Jensen and NVidia have consistently been Hardware Hawks since long before Jensen met Alice in March 2024. Arguably, any NVidia CEO has a fiduciary duty to shareholders to be a law-abiding Hardware Hawk.

Also the WSJ has reported that Chinese intelligence first developed Alice into an asset because of her relationship with Jensen. Because export controls were bad for her data center company, Alice was obviously already on the Hardware Hawk side before being an info source for Chinese intelligence. The under-reported story (dig a little on WSJ) is that after nearly two years of Commerce and Justice Dept investigating Megaspeed, the US govt still hasn't put Megaspeed on the blocked Entity List (which they can do anytime without explanation). No one knows why, but congress is starting to ask about it. BUT, strangely, NVidia voluntarily placed Megaspeed on their own blocked list in June 2025 and hasn't sold any new GPUs to Megaspeed since then (they did sell a few repair parts and replacement components to support previous sales). So... "Good Guy NVidia?" Not really, these export controls have the same severe penalties as selling cruise missiles and it's a 'strict liability' regulation on suppliers. That means if the supplier "knew, or should have known" that GPUs were being diverted, they would be guilty - and that's potentially serious jail time (in decades) for every individual employee who knew and personal fines up to $1M per card. So... yeah, Alice banging Jensen didn't stop Megaspeed getting cut-off just over a year after she met him.

Musk is also very "out" about it. Kinda like how it's okay to be gay in the CIA, as long as you're out. Being in the closet gets you fired because it makes you blackmailable.

Not a lifestyle I could ever be proud of living personally but ymmv and elon seems to be enjoying himself.

morally I don't really disagree with you, but practically I do.

This? Honestly nothing. It’s bad, but as you point out, precedented among this Epstein cohort.

But the extramarital affair with Alice Huang is quite different. NYTimes reports that Alice Huang is a Chinese spy, with whom Jensen Huang may have conspired to break the law, selling advanced NVIDIA chips to China. That affair puts the whole company at extreme legal risk. Gates, Bezos, and Brin have nothing like this on their records that I'm aware of.

As I write this, the top post on HN speculates that this is "the tip of the iceberg," indicating that there at least may be more affairs yet to be uncovered, and, plausibly, Jensen Huang may have committed even more enormous mistakes with serious consequences for NVIDIA.

Troy 2.0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hurd

Rest in peace.

You can leave sugar water in strategic places and then follow the ant trail to track where they are coming in.

Probably there will be an entire trail of ants in the morning - not just two. You can then track the place where they are coming in and block up the entrance point.

As for the above, well, let's just call it art. How should I interpret it? The analogy is that ants are affair partners, and so if I put some sugar water out, they'll all come out of the woodwork. Is this some kind of journalistic or legal exercise for building a body of evidence against Jensen? A mating strategy? I don't know! It could be both of these, either, or none! The limits of my own imagination are laid bare.

On the actual topic, though, anyone who doesn't see why this is a problem needs to think a bit harder. If the CEO puts on the show of being a family man, but is secretly getting hands-on with coworkers and spies, he's a liability to the company. It would be a stretch to say this would be acceptable behaviour even if he were above board about it, because it calls his overall judgement into question, but it would be marginally better. Remember, this is a guy who runs a multi-trillion dollar company that has limits on what it can sell to whom, because the product is a strategic asset. He can cause hundreds of billions of dollars of damage (and did!) just through his own personal behaviour. He doesn't get to have lapses like this, and if he does, is he making bad judgement calls elsewhere? It's not like it's hard to not sleep with your coworkers and clients. Billions of us do it every day.

Of course, this could just be the jealous ramblings of someone who doesn't have a sweet leather jacket...

> Everything that happens once can never happen again. But everything that happens twice will surely happen a third time.

I've found that to be a very useful heuristic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C5%8Dsuke_Uno#Economics

  Uno was highly criticized in public not for having a Geisha mistress, as it was a traditional leisure practice expected of politicians and wealthy men but instead due to relating his poor financial habits in the Japanese Diet as compared and paralleled to the ungenerosity towards his former Geisha mistress.

They'd go as far as to call it a virtue. Silicon Valley is the greatest domestic enemy this country has ever seen. They've built entire machines to protect, reward, and normalize antisocial activity.

Don't cherry pick.

Drug abuse is the culprit for a decline.

For a time, Kansas was the "Breadbasket of the Soviet Union".

What even is the problem with that really?

Did you not see his leather jackets?

We should have high standards for who is allowed to have this job. Huang should be replaced as easily and quickly as any mid-level executive who costs his company 340 billion in market cap.

He is not that easy to replace.

Yes, because while he was managing (and on some occasions sleeping with) his dozens of direct reports he made no succession plan!

A typical Ivy League MBA would cover the basics, which would be an improvement.

https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/intel-ceo-resigns...

They used it against him 7 years later. He wasn't ousted because of his relationship. It's just the tool they used.

Also he wasn't CEO at the time of his relationship.

It also wasn't an affair. He was single at the time.

With the decline in religious attendance has come a decline in marriage; from 70%+ to 50%ish over the last couple generations

But divorce rate has declined so those that do marry seem to really want it; in the before times though it was how women survived

Coupling fits with biological imperative to have partners but longterm/for life is obviously not necessary since divorce is common too, partners die, etc

That and recent research shows long term married couples are 50% more likely to develop dementia; an imbalance in effort develops where one becomes codependent and forgets how to live and the partner in charge loses grip of themselves and taking care of their partner consumes them.

Being primary caregiver to a spouse who has dementia does substantially increase the caregiver's risk of cognitive decline due to caregiver burnout. [1]

I'm not sure if this is what you were trying to express.

[0] https://jnnp.bmj.com/content/89/3/231

[1] https://www.ovid.com/jnls/neurotodayonline/fulltext/10.1097/...

18 year study found unmarried more likely to not have dementia:

https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/alz...

So either way, like how if ya live long enough some kind of cancer would get ya, so will mental illness

No beating physics

I think the easier way of looking at it is this: there is a Lancet commission that produces robust characterizations of the modifiable risk factors that lead to dementia. If you're in a marriage that promotes reducing those risk factors, you'll likely have a lower risk of dementia. Isolating one variate like this raises interesting questions, but isn't a "smoking gun'-- especially in this case since the authors themselves indicate this is a surprising result given other studies.

https://www.thelancet.com/infographics-do/dementia-risk

Seems just as reasonable but less verbose; we appear to get cancer and mental illness with old age regardless of social conditions around us. Physics and entropy win again regardless of the care we put into our semantics.

Regardless my original point was about "long term".

"Marriage staves of mental health" and "a single, long term marriage improves mental health outcomes" are two different things.

Could just be a tight knit quasi-nuclear family social circle is sufficient too but social desirability biases lead is to lean into marriage tradition.

Source: dude trust me

Tell that to all the animals that exhibit long-term, often life-long coupling.

Lots of animals engages in non consensual rape; humans need to get on a level?

Don't anthropomorphize ducks.

Codependency to survive altogether is different than "2 people stuck together by social pressure even if its not working for them" which happens a lot to marriage often becomes unnatural abuse.

Unlike ferrets we engineered around raw need to hunt rabbits; we have grocery stores to serve the codependency.

It came from the past so it's natural is a terrible argument. Just a "dude trust me; its how grandpa did it"

my wife and I date other people, you'd be surprised how big the ENM/Poly community is when you start looking

every argument that attempts to humanize and 'us too' these types of folks (billionaires that own islands and ultra-yachts) totally bewilders me.

the thing that's stopping Joe from the gas station is that he lacks the yacht and the credit line, not any ethics. Jensen's no more or less human than anyone else. The issue with megacorporation's is structural, not some "these types of people' provincial nonsense

For this conclusion to be valid, you have to provide the proportion of tech ceos who cheat.

It's a corporate governance problem because the relationship can be seen as tainting personnel decisions, even if it actually doesn't, but that's hardly a morality issue. It's HR optics.

Note that I'm not defending Huang, but I think he's done for because of the spy thing more than because of this.

This is why you should only do one shitty thing at a time and not multiple.

It's inappropriate to use coercion.

This is questionable in the context of one of the adults holding a position of power. Also, even when assuming the adults are peers, there's another saying 'Don't shit where you eat' which is rooted in a lot of stories of workplace relationships going wrong in very creative ways.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0Z66pOkcB4

2. Other employees might feel that the employee having sex with the manager is getting better treatment at work.

Which catch-22 swaps the power imbalance.

So it's all opportunistic, at this point.

Then Investor lawsuit kick off, more allegations, a big drop, profit. Then "oh well", "can't prove it".

Dumb language question: if Powell is married, why isn’t she referred to as Mrs. Powell in this article?

Many people find it demeaning to address women differently depending on whether or not they are married, especially when we don't do the same for men.

She insisted they get my surname only. So that's what they have.

Notably, both my (now ex) wives insisted on taking my last name. I didn’t really care either way.

I was always taught it was 'Master' for unmarried and young men.

I remember when I was a kid, bank correspondence would address me as MASTER. I found it amusing.

I don’t think they do that anymore though??? I think our son has always been MR to them, even when he was a 5 year old

But when Mrs first stood for Mistress, the word Mistress wasn't "loaded" at all.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/mistress

Only in English.

If an abbreviation is never expanded, is it still an abbreviation? Personally I think it isn’t; I advocate for condensing i.e./e.g. to simply ie and eg, though this is a minority opinion.

> [Ms. is] intended as a default form of address for women regardless of marital status. [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs. [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ms.

Wikipedia tries to make it sound like it’s some old tradition, but it’s actually fairly new, with the prior historical references being obscure until it was resurrected.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/insider/1986-ms-joins-the...

I don’t understand this need to rewrite history. Nobody in this thread is objecting to the use of the term.

I don’t understand this need to rewrite history. Nobody in this thread is objecting to the use of the term.

Skeletor will return next week with more disturbing reminders about passage of time...

The term is recent in a linguistic sense. Even if you personally think it’s ancient history, there are plenty of us alive where it was invented in our lifetime.

What was that all about if you both perfectly agree on the timeline?

> Classy edit, btw.

Edit? I did not edit my post. I think you may not understand what that means. It is neither classy nor unclassy, it is a type of meme.

I am the parent of the thread. It's all me.

It's simply a fact that the term was revived in the 70s and popularized in the 80s.

Given the magnitude of more recent shifts in language around equity, 50 years is ancient.

Okay, then. Good luck with that.

Deftly convincing my rhetorical opponent of my youthful vigor by misunderstanding what they wrote and getting noticeably worked up about being called ‘ancient’

More to the point, what’s the median human lifespan, in first-world countries? (average lifespan in the US is almost 80)

I don’t know what to call this, but none of the words that come to mind are positive.

You could have avoided the issue entirely by using clearer language like "in the last 40 years."

The idea that I was claiming things older than me are "irrelevant" is nowhere near orbit of anything I wrote.

I hope your day looks up.

Gloria Steinem cofounded Ms. Magazine in the early 70s which helped popularize it further.

Anyway, how old are you that well over half a century is “fairly new” to you? Do you still wear galoshes and use a mimeograph?

“It is generally considered polite to address a woman by Ms. rather than Mrs., unless the preference of the woman in question is clearly known. This is especially true in written communication, as dictated by professional etiquette.”

There was such a huge push to convert all `master` branches to `main`[1], yet feminists have no issues addressing each other as master/mistress.

I'm not a native speaker, but in my experience, people don't even talk like that anyway. Newspapers may write "Mr Trump" but people just say Trump.

[1]: Not me, I still use `master`.

But as we all know, the US is all that matters, so you may as well state outright that it “is so”, and move on.

Hm. Weird. Never seen that before. Let's check the source, emilypost.com:

>Mx. Is the universal title that can be used by anyone. It is gender non-identifying. Even if you identify specifically with a gender you may still use Mx. and you may see Mx. used when the sender is unaware of your title.

https://emilypost.com/advice/guide-to-addressing-corresponde...

OK, im out. I'm immediately out.

This is taught to children in the United States. I didn't go to an especially good school and I remember it to this day. If you're not from the US the custom may be different.

Perhaps you will consider the advice from Grammarly [0] as a more acceptable source.

[0] https://www.grammarly.com/blog/commonly-confused-words/ms-mr...

No doubt, in today's absurdly woke school system.

there is woman,

and there is Klinefelter's.

(worth the karma hit)

Miss indicated that a woman was unmarried. Mrs indicated that she was. Ms was added to behave like Mr in that it doesn't indicate marital status.

Especially in a business context, it would be unprofessional to ask if a woman is married or not merely for determining which title to use. Unless you want to have an affair with her, of course.

Once that's in place, I would feel better about the use of Mrs.

https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/purity.htm...

While I'm at it, I don't see how "miss" can be more respectful than "mistress" when the former is a clipping of the latter, so a miss is less than a mistress.

Because she is about to be single?

I wonder if you'd still think the same after you read Defoe's Roxana and Dumas fils's Lady of the Camellias.

No one is calling him a sinner.

Now that I know where you're coming from, yeah, that is interesting.

I say this as a Brit and we are the same, only we are just as perfidious (maybe worse) but hide it from are selves and others so we are easy to blackmail.

Notably, it does get folks incensed, and it’s a good way to take out a senior leader if all other leverage fails.

It’s clearly some kind of hit piece. Dumb of Huang to have stepped on whatever landmine he did, let alone allow himself to get this exposed, but whatever.

I wonder if it’s someone trying to short Nvidia?

Is it that hard to keep your wiener out of people who report to you? Why is the reaction "this is really common and it's unfair to target this guy" and not "at least one of them is finally seeing some consequences, now let's hope there's more to follow"? Apparently having and expecting basic ethics is "pearl clutching." Fuck that. If powerful people are commonly awful and I expect better from them, that's a problem with them, not with me.

Of course he should be fired for this.

The reality - at these levels - is that to rise to these levels typically requires that others involved feel comfortable they have enough leverage on you that they can force you out ‘quietly’ if they need to do so.

Which is what is happening.

I’ve seen some wild things that were allowed to continue because the math was paying out at the time.

Somewhere the math changed, and this is the consequence.

Post election ‘cleanup’ in approach?

Change in expectations on future growth trajectory?

Someone with their own interests (shorting the stock) got too much leverage?

This is already costing individual folks billions, and shareholders hundreds of billions. that kind of thing often involves someone’s ‘chess moves’, even if it’s just them blowing up in their faces.

Part of the point of all this is that he's supposed to be in control of his emotions and able to make the best decisions without letting his emotions interfere.

If he can't even make the very simple decision to keep his dick in his pants in this very clear breach of commitments he has publicly made, then what other terrible decisions is he making? What other commitments will he break because it feels good and he can't control himself?

It's a sign of a really bad leader that they do this.

Maybe eventually. After they have been doing it for decades. When it’s inconvenient for folks now.

Notably, every senior woman leader I worked for had something similar going on too.

I agree but that ship sailed a long time ago and this action is being blown out of proportion.

Look at the president of the US that is a guy who has to go (and all the people around him) and is still in office.

Quite frankly he has had an affair with consenting adult women not trafficked children why are the knives out for him when this is all he has done?

Because he made commitments to people to not do this.

If you promise to do (or not do) something, and then you break that promise, you should be held to account for it. It should be obvious that you cannot be trusted to keep promises in future. Nothing you say should be believed, because you are clearly an untrustworthy person. You should not be trusted to make decisions that involve other people's money.

And, in addition. If you're a manager, you are responsible for the people reporting to you. You're the adult in the room. If your idea of managing people includes having sex with them, then that is an indication that you are unable to manage people.

This is not about consent. It's a different set of concerns than e.g. Russel Brand. This is about Huang not living up to the professional standards that we expect from people in authority. It's about being a good, trustworthy, custodian of other people's money, and about being a good choice as CEO of this business. Not having enough self-control to avoid these situations is a really good indicator that he is not a good choice for this role, because of that lack of self-control. If he can't control himself, how can he be relied on to control the organisation?

> This is not about consent. It's a different set of concerns than e.g. Russel Brand.

My point was the president who has brought about an expensive war is an example of this times 1000. I think all we can infer from this is he is unfaithful to his wife, the inference you make about his commitment to his fiduciary responsibility is incorrect to me. They are different things and he has not shown he has been a highly effective CEO who actually has technical knowledge.

Perhaps I am overly cynical but I think a lot of CEO's (and other's for that matter) will engage in dishonesty.

Consider Aquinas on merchants (possibly quoting Chrysostom possibly mistaken)

> “He that buys a thing in order that he may sell it, entire and unchanged, at a profit, is the trader who is cast out of God’s temple.”

My claim is not that this practice is wrong per-say but even in this kind of business of arbitrage you can see at guile and cunning, that is hard to deny. Maybe he only lacked the ability to hide it.

I would ask you who would run a business better a man who is unable to use cunning, guile and manipulation (marketing) or one who does not. Their is times when the sort of morality you talk about is important and times where it is a hindrance and most people are evil, if you want the good Aristocratic souls you would do well not to look for it in the world of commerce.

He’s already proven himself to be untrustworthy… what else is he lying about, hmm?

More like 20% admit to it.

Different scales, but all should be considered negative and penalised.

Well, he is his superior in a work setting, so there's that. There can be consequences for rejecting your boss's advances, which is the reason this kind of thing is usually heavily frowned upon!

Is it possible you are conflating USD with Nvidia shares that he hasn’t sold? Is he not allowed to have 3.5% of the voting power for Nvidia?

Unsurprising to see that the economic illiteracy that plagues reddit has made its way here, a place that is made by billionaires and tries to find and mint new billionaires

They're already being sued by shareholders over the first affair. The suit claims Nvidia's relationship with Megaspeed posed a "material risk" to Nvidia's reputation and business prospects. Of course sleeping with your own employees is also considered a bad business practice.

It does feel a bit like Jensen is being held to a very much unfairly higher standard than, say, elon, who does drugs, lies extravagantly, has an openly corrupt relationship with the goverment, build the world's biggest deepfake porn machine, etc etc.

I don't disagree that they are being held at different standards, however Elon should really be held far more accountable for his manipulations around Tesla stock, porn machines, Space X fraud etc.

I'm talking fraud. The SEC should be getting involved.

Outside of his fan bubble, Elon Musk is really not well-reputed.

Until the medical advances come raining from the sky, that is yet to be proven.

You of course are doing your part by not using any of the data centres with his cards right ?

I would have to agree. Also at least three top 40 hits in the US and 7 in Canada.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Rae_Jepsen

Also see our friend Elon Musk,

Bill Gates,

Jeff Bezos,

Finance fundamental research since it is well-known how precarious the job situation in academia is.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/former-nvidia-ceo-huang-h...

Obviously not super relevant to this but that's where people get the idea at least.

I hated the misogynistic narrative that Huang was somehow helpless against a super-spy-seductress. Men can in fact control themselves, and it takes a lot of effort, you might even say willpower, to turn a business meeting into a bedroom encounter, especially when you're in the public eye. If Huang was targeted, it was because he was an easy target.

For good reason. The level of fuck-up in sleeping with a Chinese spy and then having the gall to try and corruptly quash the investigations into it, coming clean only after Congress flips, is nuts.

I’m not convinced a good CEO can’t have affairs. I am convinced a liar and corrupter can’t.

Yeah but then what's the point of being one of the wealthiest and most influential men in the world, if you can't slay some puss when the mood hits you?

This is in fact very mild and tame behavior for someone who's a famous influential billionaire. The other ones went to an island where they ... you know ... kids.

Perhaps don't get married then, or have a consensual open relationship.

I love all these comments that are basically like "what's the point of being a billionaire if you can't stick your dick wherever you want when the mood strikes you and lie about it to your wife."

The point I was making was, that what's the point of becoming a powerful billionaire if your life now has more restrictions than the lower classes? People amass wealth and power to gain more freedoms from societal rules, not less.

EDIT: Actually, yeah, just read it, even worse than I thought. How could I not give this man some slack? I mean, he managed to not go to an island where they abuse children, I should have known he's a good person!!

Clearly you don't understand that sexual desires and human constructed morality are different things, often in opposition with each other.

Surely he didn't know when he got married that 2 decades later, he'd become a billionaire surrounded by women more attractive than he could score before, otherwise he probably wouldn't have gotten married in the first place, if he knew a p**sy tsunami would await him.

Maybe his autographing that women's bra (boob?) at a trade show was a red flag…

I pity whomever is in a relationship with someone who actually thinks that way. I'm disgusted, to be honest.

People don't see the money, the global geopolitical issues at stake - they see the man - they see the jacket.

This is one of the great mysteries in entrepreneurship.

I own 3 leather jackets and yet fortune has not come to me.

Perhaps the problem is I do not wear them every day - wearing a leather jacket every day - nay every minute takes focus and commitment that I simply cannot match Jensen on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6gHS-eJNCQ

(If he's done this without his wife's full consent, he's certainly a despicable human, but that doesn't change that this looks like a really nicely orchestrated PR hit job)

If it's true that he had the affair with the CCP spy or otherwise was encouraged to sell GPUs using loopholes that violate export bans, that would put him and NVDA into some hot water.

Investors do not like that and the implications for any rapid change in NVDA valuation would be immense.

Also, if you cannot comprehend that there are issues of consent when it comes to having a sexual relationship with someone whose career you can destroy with no consequences, then I seriously hope you never get a management position.

You don’t have a right to a workspace free of social discomfort or pressure though. Feeling some pressure to bring them a donut isn’t protected in the same way unless it’s becoming harassment.

FTFY

It is basically the difference between impropriety and appearance or possibility of impropriety

So you prohibit it in all cases, punish in all cases, and then you don't have to wade into that mess.

https://www.newsweek.com/map-shows-16-states-where-its-illeg...

Regardless, the saying, "don't shit where you eat" exists for a reason. Huang engaging in this relationship shows profound poor judgment. Is it wise to have someone with such poor judgment running a company of Nvidia's scale and importance?

2. having sex with your own subordinate employee seems like potential abuse of power for starters and it is just calling for lawsuit, because while she can say today it was consensual, tomorrow she can say the other way

if he would be having sex with random girls he found in bars it would be certainly less problematic than having sex with people who are directly related to his company

btw. it also shows his character, if he was unfaithful once, he was unfaithful twice, do you really think these are only two cases and it ends just with his sex life?

How is the CEO having a secret affair with somebody at his company not relevant to the company?

I know things are different when you're only thinking with your johnson but jeez, showing up with the same woman in front of the media many times and even displaying affection in front of a camera (there is pictures of them with light body contact afaik), what did he think was going to happen?

He should have retired and done a handover last month and left at his peak to a beach villa on Maui...

If you like downvoting so much then downvote this, you piece of shit. At least this is warranted.

This is not their first rodeo, is it? Wonder how much was offered? Did the person take it? ("hey, psst, we'll throw the latest GPU card on the table, how about now?")

Then, will Huang issue another, equally sincere, public apology to his wife about this other affair. He could have grouped them both into a batch for efficiency I guess.

> sexually obscene; pornographic

0: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/黃

"Do not #&$+ where you eat."

Seriously, a second mistress, who is unqualified?

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/11/11/nvidia-jensen-huang-affair-e...

I just put a large amount of money into Nvidia, and I am aghast.

You never, ever have intimate relationships with professional connections. Ever.

https://hyperallergic.com/nvidia-ceo-jensen-huangs-situation...

Prostotution is legal there. I never availed myself in this, but I saw what was available in the Provenza.

Cartagena is accustomed to this, but Medellin is not so much.

I am a follower of Kant, a formulation of his categorical imperative is that "we never treat people as a means, but always as ends in themselves."

I try not to touch people, because that is a big ask.

You have my deepest sympathy that your parents hadn't quite evolved to that level of civilisation to teach you the same. Life must be tough for your childhood in such primitive and vile family.

Your comment would have been fine, and even appropriate, had you stopped at the first sentence. What you wrote after that is much worse than the comment you're criticizing, and obviously a bannable offense.

I don't want to ban you, so if you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. We've had to ask you this more than once before.

That's totally a joke people would make. Joking about nominative determinism happens all the time.

And nominative determinism is a dick move regardless of whether people do it or not.

I joked that she was a PRC intelligence asset because of what a perfect partner she was and came out of nowhere, which doubled as a subtle dig at her family having been supporters of the cultural revolution.

In terms of sexual crimes, I think there's cases and situations where there can be coercion, but it's not necessarily the case.

Oh also it's a breach of the marital contract of course.

Marital contracts are not unlike commercial contracts and we are finding out the CEO is in the (non)business of systematically violating them.

Ya'll need help.

But I agree, anyone within the Nvidia circle looking to spread the information is certainly not doing it to help Jensen.

The same people who want to ban open-weight models. For safety, of course.

so no, IMO, not likely China

It's one thing to say your boss cornered you in the office, it's a another thing to go through the entire IVF procedure and then pretend you had no chance of escaping or whistleblowing over the however many weeks it takes.

Would prefer if more like Elon tbh, don't cheat and just be open about your relationships with clear consent lines, causes investors far less grief. He's weird and thus when you are investing, you are absolutely clear what sort of person you are investing in.

my point being, Buffet still is Buffet.

hopes Jepsen life privacy is kept and they solved it backstage whatever they like.

If he cheats —- multiple times —- to his wife, what stops him from cheating to you, investors, etc…?

Maybe he is just very horny and that’s all, but his credibility and trust has taken a toll. Like the TBPN guys said, every time we see him now, we’re just going to think of this situation.

Has any of this deception also trickled down to business matters? I hope not, but it’s also a non-zero chance.

—-

Who should be the CEO? And what does this mean for the AI trade?

I don’t know who the CEO should be. I honestly think the most entertaining outcome would be for Elon to be the CEO but that would just be crazy and not sure how likely that is.

As for the AI trade, two scenarios come to mind:

1. Deception didn’t get into business matters, everything continues business as usual except for some deceleration.

2. Deception trickled down to business matters, say circular deals start smelling bad or something else, the market will panic and AI could hit a winter period.

—-

Just a speculative hot take!

My reasoning was that that he had become too powerful while largely avoiding politically charged positions, or other "stuff" that can be used to "control" him.

The political and intelligence establishment doesnt particularly like powerful individuals who remain politically independent.... outside of their control.

That is why ancient wisdom said you should keep low profile if you are super rich.

I hope Jensen can get through this.

So many people here think character doesn't matter but it has now caught up with him as much as it has for Trump.

For years he was in the same anti-human AI hype club way too similar like Altman and he thought no consequences can catch him... it really doesn't take any conspiracy here. Everything he has chosen was all his doing.

Those are "external influences", but your own gravitational field has warped them. Even the president wants your money and influence, and needs your company to do well, there is literally no one who will "give it to you straight", and it warps your mind.

The Roman commanders would sometimes hire someone to stand behind them and remind them they were only human for this reason (to avoid natural hubris), it was seen as naturally arising in these circumstances, and needed to be combatted to remain effective.

Desire is the enemy of happiness. To abandon sorrow, abjure want.

We are all in wanting. Our want in lesser that the needs of our partners, our friends, and our world.

Will NVDA board give Huang a no-confidence vote before end of year, and give him the golden parachute?

Perhaps his cousin can help him get a new job at a chip firm.