Everyone knows how it would reflect on the company if it were to get out. He made the decision that the risk was worth it.

It is not a stretch to imagine that either a) someone could be sexually deviant without being dishonest in business relationships b) Huangs have an open marriage.

It was really the second affair, the one with an employee (a business relationship) that forced the resignation.

If OpenAI has taught me anything it's that for too many people might makes right. (Whether that's hard or soft power.)

I’m not deluded to think HN is perfect, I’ve been here for many, many years and seen the imperfections. That said, this subject has exposed a deep, rich vein of depravity that makes me incredibly uncomfortable.

Some find these errors deeply concerning. There are dozens of us! Dozens!

On the other hand, yes, the capitalistic focus those kinds of people have is indeed disgusting... but remember that you're on a U.S. website filled with people working in the U.S. tech industry. Unfettered capitalism is so deeply ingrained in U.S. culture that it's entirely natural to them to prioritise money and shareholder value.

Does any of your weaknesses or character flaws imply you should never be hired again? Or do you think you are the only human being ever to not have any flaws?

Some of the most popular people in history had deep flaws that did not tarnish their work. Einstein had an affair and later married his cousin while he was married to another woman. Should he have being ousted from any university because you think he would cheat everywhere else? Tesla was in love with a pigeon. Do you discount his work because of that?

Many profess to want a world where character, integrity and honesty still matter. Of course, only when it applies to others. “We judge ourselves by our intentions and others by their behaviour.” - Stephen Covey

People with outsized power should be held to higher--not absolute--standards. Not lower ones because they hold some purse strings.

This is not a real argument, just a sort of a public admission that you're a cheater and you rationalize it by saying everyone cheats.

I disagree with the original premise, and I don't care if a good CEO is incontinent sexually as long as he does not provide blackmail material (which Huang did) or do it on the job (which he did.) I think you can lie to your wife and not lie to your mom, and vice-versa. But many people have a moral foundation that is more important as a guide to their own behavior than as something they lord over other people. Not everybody is cheating.

Also, "everybody is doing something" is never an excuse.

https://nypost.com/2019/03/07/martin-shkreli-is-still-runnin...

Foibles are tertiary to shareholders after "ability to make line go up."

Pulling out The Pharma bro as an example is completely irrelevant to any even half respectable business. If we’re talking about pay day loan industry or MLM companies, sure maybe.

I don’t think you can prove the core point that someone cheating in their marriage is more likely to cheat elsewhere. In reality, people are complex and will have different interpretations of morality. I’d bet you could find serial criminals who are scrupulously faithful in their marriage.

In reality, you’re dealing with three different domains: personal morality vs. company rules vs. nation state legality. There’s no accounting for how individual people weigh up their stance on each, and there’s not necessarily a correlation between any of them.

It's trust. Trust is a very useful lubricant and accelerant for any kind of relationship, whether business or personal.

Without it, one would have to have the means and spend the time to analyze the potential for duplicity in any given interaction, build mechanisms to enforce agreements, monitor/verify outcomes, and/or retaliate forcefully enough against those that break agreements. You would largely be unable to work with other people or groups. Meanwhile, you'll be easily and massively out-completed by those that can establish trust-based relationships with each other.

This is quite important for a CEO to be effective. If people see a CEO doesn't follow through on his commitments when he feels he can get away with it, they won't trust him or the company he controls, which shrinks the company's opportunities.

Put it the short way: character, integrity and honesty build trust, and trust is a huge advantage. In a competitive landscape, a base level of business ethics is table stakes, and Jensen likely doesn't have that base level. (Note that the three affairs we've heard about all have significant business ethics implications, not simply personal ones.)