What are you're doing in your comment is a fallacy known in economics called survivorship bias.

The NVIDIAs of the world are vastly outnumbered by corporations who made a long term bet that failed, but because you're counting the successes, not the attempts, you see vastly inflated outcomes. Count the attempts to make these long shots, and Huang appears very lucky indeed. Crystal ball? Hardly! He couldn't forsee the outcome of 3 (is it still 3, or has the body count grown) affairs.

To prove Huang is a genius, you'd have to demonstrate that a different CEO of NVIDIA would have done something different.

▲

SR2Z 10 hours ago | parent [-]

NVIDIA is 33 years old! How much more successful does the largest corporation in the world have to be for you to admit some skill was required? Another two decades?

> Crystal ball? Hardly! He couldn't forsee the outcome of 3 (is it still 3, or has the body count grown) affairs.

Fortunately, I'm not claiming that Huang is a genius at getting away with affairs. I'm claiming that if any CEO can be called a genius at running their business, Huang can.

▲

buellerbueller 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm not saying Huang is skill-less, and by making that claim in your comment, you are moving the goalposts. I am saying it is not obvious that he would have done genius-level better than a different CEO.

Your best claim is that Nvidia is the biggest company in the world; therefore Huang is a genius. Maybe; some days Apple is also in the running for biggest company in the world. By your metric Tim Cook is therefore a genius. This makes me seriously doubt your metric.

	▲	SR2Z 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Tim Cook did not build Apple from the ground up. Steve Jobs did, and if he were still in charge he would still unquestionably be a genius. You can doubt my metric, but it is quite difficult to grow a company to a trillion dollars while staying in charge the whole time.