Are you saying that because he invented something that changed the world, his misbehavior should be ignored? If that's what you're saying, I wonder where you would draw the line: an affair? Embezzling? Murder? At what point would the misbehavior be so bad that it should not be excused by his past inventions? At what point does the inventor not get to use "But I'm changing the world" as an excuse?

Or perhaps I'm misreading you. You did, after all, open with saying that you agree with my comment that you're replying to. So if your only point is "the board didn't care, that was an excuse to get rid of him" and you're not excusing his behavior, then sure, I agree with that statement. His behavior was an open secret among the company, after all; they had to have known, but were willing to ignore it when it was convenient to them. Which is immoral of them, let me add. I agree with you that that's what they did. I do NOT agree (and I hope you're not saying) that it was ethical or moral of them to ignore it until it became publicly known.

Obviously he must be punished, at least for having an affair with a subordinate, which until now is the only thing that is certainly wrong, from the PoV of the company.

However, if he is fired, that is more a punishment for the company than for him, because he is extremely rich and at the age of retirement, so he does not work because he needs to, but just because he enjoys it.

A real punishment for him would be to lose without compensation a part of his NVIDIA shares.

If it is ever proven that he broke any export control law, then a punishment for that is a decision for the judicial system.

>Are you saying that because he invented something that changed the world, his misbehavior should be ignored?

Yes or at best give him a slap on the wrist. You are not comprehending the scale of change that he is involved in. He is shifting the course of humanity. People don't go to jail for cheating. Right? Why don't people go to jail? Because it's not that big of a deal. It's wrong. But the punishment fits the crime.

There are ALSO no specific bylaws for firing an executive for an affair. ALSO because it's minor. Most successful executives that are making the company a shitload of value won't fire someone for that.

>Which is immoral of them

Strict morals is a sort of evil in itself. It displays a lack of intelligence and awareness of how morally grey reality is. In changing the world, Jensen could be involved with the lives billions. He could be responsible for immense poverty or immense wealth and greatness for all of humanity. We don't know, but stopping all of this because of an affair is ludicrous.