He was playing both sides and got caught. Nothing more.

"It's not immoral to violate trade sanctions if you don't think they should exist".

However the fact he was having an affair muddies the waters on the two. At best, the optics look bad to someone outside. Yes, he could have been opposed for money reasons, and that’s a position that needs no more explanation.

But how do we know he wasn’t being whispered to by the smoking baddie he was trying to impress? Maybe he’d not have taken the risk were he not having this affair but we know what men do when their ego is on the line. Case in point: Musk paying people to play PoE for him and losing his shit when he was caught.

Do I think money is a good enough explanation? Yes. Could I believe that what’s in his pants also played a part? Also yes.

No, he probably wasn't doing it because of the Chinese spy. But when you are sleeping with a Chinese spy people are going to have questions.

You're getting downvoted for this, but it has some merit. It could be argued that NVDA's flat structure is what led to the company's success - Jensen himself greenlit the development of CUDA from the anecdotes I've heard. However, in the last 2 or 3 years the board should have pushed for more redundancy and a succession plan.

Since NVDA had such a flat corporate structure with Huang having ~60 direct reports, I expect that the company will be lost for a period of time as they try to get their bearings. This is an opportunity for AMD, INTC and others.

It turned them into one of the most valuable companies in history. The board can figure out succession now.

>the real risk is the default world tech stack shifts to open models on Chinese chips.

As someone who isn't based in the US/EU and whose job is to deploy LLMs on premises, I can't wait for the moment when China starts selling its GPUs globally en masse with a proper CUDA equivalent. It's going to be cheaper in the long term and without all the export control drama.

Exactly!

Having compute is no moat. You can always just build more.

Yea my understanding is that is also what it was about. I don't know if he knows state secrets or not. The affect on national security is more that if he's selling billions of dollars of GPU's to foreign adversary's he's helping foreign adversary's gain power over the US. The video in question talks about how selling GPU's is like selling enriched uranium, thus the national security concern. Whether that's a good analogy or not, I don't really know. But the people at these AI companies (ANT/OpenAI) do seem to talk a lot about how there's a non-zero chance AI will end the world so..

Yeah, this is the standard/textbook move. Keep things moving forward and the financials in order during the search.

> Interim. They just need someone to crisis manage.

For Nvidia's sake let's hope so - but I suspect the problem is that anybody who knows their stuff will have the same opinions that got Jensen fired.

> Maybe the AI focus wasn’t all Jensens idea even

The source of the idea isn't important - Jobs famously 'borrowed' some of the best ideas from outside the company. The key skill is to be able to tell between the good and bad ideas and make the right strategic choices.

those are mere gamer issues. perhaps more relevant ten year ago, but these days, the only question is the rack-scale products (and in that market, Nvidia's driver game has been pretty OK, though unfortunately closed-source).

Opinions on Nvidia depend heavily on one's shares:gpus ratio.

Yeah, its just their karma finally paying dividends.

And yet their products are superior to the competition. Yes, it's a sad day.

He also fostered shifting the product line to enterprise- dominant and therefore fostered the acceleration of decline of personal computing. There’s no nuance that I can see reflected in his actions; big money AI spenders come, he jumps in feet first. If “democratization of AI” is even a concept, it’s pretty insulting that the personal consumer is cut out (but let’s make sure China is still getting hardware)

Intel has some good compilers that take advantage of their hardware don't they? I think AMD now understands the software side of things, and is trying to fix it. Wonder how long it will take for them to get close to Nvidia's software side?

Apple's software quality has jumped off a cliff in the last few years, unfortunately.

Yes, we’re gonna find out how important he was. If he is on the level as some of the other great CEOs Nvidia gonna have trouble, this little flare could be the beginning of the AI bubble bursting. Because I don’t see Intel or AMD rising to the same level as Nvidia. Microsoft seems to be having bad luck with their team-ups.

Definitely not average, but Nvidia is the definition of one trick, and that one trick long-term will be their downfall, Intel is in the same position and so is AMD and Microsoft.

Due to sanctions there’s one Chinese company that seems to have become a multi-dimensional company we won’t know for sure for another two years.

Being a vertical computer company appears to be coming back in style bring on the 1980s. early 1990s.

It is because of his vision. And with him gone, we shall find out about Nvidia, when Apple computer went through a succession of mediocre CEOs, they were on the ropes if it wasn’t for the founder CEO coming back, Apple would’ve been history like Sun, SGI, Acorn, Commodore, Digital and a host of other computer companies from the 1980s and mid-1990s.

Western companies have had that problem. when the visionary CEO bites the dust. I think the Eastern companies are even more susceptible.

Note: Nvidia is the very definition of a one trick company I think they were in trouble long-term no operating system, Microsoft is in trouble in the other direction. No real in-house hardware ability. Long-term you have to have the ability of both in-house to adjust and iterate over the long haul with the changing conditions in tech.

Exactly.

He may not have 'invented' CUDA but he saw the potential and gave it resources to be created and continually developed.

How many "CUDA-like" ideas have be squashed at other companies by leaders that don't see the potential or are willing to take a multi-year loss?

IMO, it's like SpaceX vs other rocket companies - especially Blue Origin.

Bezos, at least at first, had just as much money if not more than Musk. So why did SpaceX do so much better than them and every other rocket company. I despise Musk personally, and he's generally not as smart as he makes himself out to be - but there is something there he does differently than others in his position, some with similar resources as he does as well.

Let's see if nVidia goes under now that he quit. I bet it won't and doesn't matters. You probably thought Apple couldn't go on without Jobs.