That's because it is. This is the worst case of a classic blackmail operation against Jensen and it is highly co-ordinated with major news outlets like the NYT, WSJ, The Economist and FT.
Someone powerful or a group of people did not want open weight AI models and Nvidia GPUs being accessible or sold in China and either:
1) Wanted him (Jensen) to stop selling GPUs in China and had his affairs recorded and used as dirt against him as selling GPUs into China also threatened the AI labs.
2) Insiders (and spies) used the affairs against Jensen to knowingly smuggle Nvidia GPUs into China from Singapore (despite the export issue) with too many of them that knew, and that leaked to the wrong person.
Not even China wants Nvidia GPUs and urges chinese AI companies to use homegrown Huawei GPUs. The chinese AI labs still choose Nvidia GPUs over Huawei anyway.
As I’m sure you know it can be both true that Jensen was getting side pieces like it was going out of style, and also be true that this is a coordinated hit. Note that the media for instance isn’t racing to investigate the strange sex lives of Anthropic senior leadership.
It can also be true that this is the exact pattern you see with powerful men.
Because, the powerful men can hide things for a long time, right up until they are no longer powerful.
That's like the entire point of #MeToo. Women are very upset with how much known misbehavior was going on that was kept hush because the men involved were in positions of power, and people preferred keeping that power structure stable over literally putting people doing sex crimes to justice.
What you are seeing is that when women feel like they will be listened to when they come out with a story like this, they will.
That, and there's also the simple effect of "A rich person is suddenly getting dragged through the media, perfect time to share your own gossip if you have some"
You can't blame this on a conspiracy when such simple incentives will cause the same phenomenon, and we have ample examples of exactly that happening.
So why isn’t that incentive leading to reporters talking about the unusual sex lives of powerful men at Anthropic? It isn’t so much a conspiracy as it is the the Rubio hawk faction eliminating one of their more potent foes.
You understand that the AI labs in the US have taken a lot of money from thousands of investors. They don't benefit whatsoever in losing their investment to powerful open weight AI models that undermine closed weight ones especially chinese AI models that are rapidly catching up to them.
Nvidia was investing the open weight model ecosystem after realizing that the AI labs were moving off of their GPUs and using in-house chips. Jensen made sure that some Chinese AI labs were getting Nvidia GPUs in order to slow them down in relying or building their domestic ones.
Why would someone who invested a lot of money into any of the >1TN+ AI labs accept the risk of a chinese AI lab undermining them in their future IPO plans?
> This is the worst case of a classic blackmail operation against Jensen and it is highly co-ordinated with major news outlets like the NYT, WSJ, The Economist and FT.
Jensen was already being blackmailed by the Trump administration for the past year, which Trump all but admits openly here:
@24:20 if the link doesn't maintain the timestamp on your platform.
He doesn't name Jensen, but in hindsight with everything that has come out (including information on the timing of the Rubio memo) he is obviously talking about him and threatening him with jail to become a yes-man, and Jensen complied.
So IMO the real question isn't who is blackmailing Jensen (we know that), the question is: when he was already complying with blackmail for a year, who decided to burn him as an asset? Did it come from the people who were blackmailing him, or an external source? And who gains/loses by the loss of leverage they already had on him?
Yep. Maybe the other parties thought they had a special thing with him and now realize they're just another body? That makes people vindictive and willing to talk.
His security detail is also no longer worried about retribution and are likely complying with an internal investigation.
It's very likely his affairs were simply open secrets within the C suite.
Not even. Credibility is one thing. If people wanted to out him but were afraid, the time to be believed is now. The other is just that everyone is looking now and with all this attention more things come out.
Of course they do, but they don't usually deny it against the other party in the affair, they deny it to their boss, their wife, whoever they have a liability to, so it's a different situation entirely.
The affairs he had ( revealed so far at least ) weren't with junior people - they were also exec's so I don't think there is any suggestion of abuse of power here.
It's much more likely that some people knew and journalists went around asking people.
Powell didn't join Nvidia as exec though. She originally joined Nvidia in a business development role, before being promoted to her current role in 2017
That's long enough ago that it seems likely that Huang got to know her in her current role. But if the affair started earlier than 2017, there is the suggestion of abuse of power. Not with Powell as victim, but everyone else who hoped to get that role instead of her
Anything is possible. But in these scenarios I think it's wise to apply the following 2 principles.
1. Stick to the facts - speculation helps no-one.
2. Don't assume to fight on behalf of people you don't know.
For example there appears to be an assumption that his wife has been deeply wronged and she is the victim. This may well be the case. but it also might not be. That part of this story is a private matter for them and not helped by speculation and assumptions.
In fact I'd go further - you have in effect just accused Powell of being promoted by sleeping with the boss based entirely on speculation. Not sure that's helpful either.
Jensen named his wife and family as victims in his apology letter. I see no reason not to believe him. Under what circumstances might a person's spouse not be a victim of the person's extramarital affairs??
She might be a victim following the publicity. Or many other reasons, really. I am not saying she might, but in some relationships, what you’re allowed to do and what you’re allowed to let the world know are different things.
He might also feel he needed to do it for many reasons, some more self-serving than others.
I largely agree. At this stage we don't known enough to tell who is a victim here. We likely will never know for sure, nor do we have a right to demand to know
My speculation is purely for its explaining or predictive power on the question why all of this is coming out at once, and who's behind revealing all this. I favor the "conspiracy" version (someone wants him gone and exposes his real secrets in the most damaging way). But if we consider that this might all be organically triggered by the revelation of the spy affair we can't discount that the numerically largest group that feels wronged by his affairs might be employees that were disadvantaged whenever affair partners got special treatment
Shielding Powell from that implication is _why Huang has an obligation not to sleep with her._
Whether or not it’s the case, if the behavior is known to others in the company it also creates a hostile work environment for ambitious female employees who are not at Powell’s level but hope to reach it.
Regarding his wife, I agree. He and his wife are both smart capable people. They may have worked our certain relationship parameters that they are both fine with.
he's the most powerful CEO in the world; you don't even need actual abuse of power when it's impossible to avoid the appearance of abuse. I know that as a coworker of the executive sleeping with the CEO I would completely discount her skills & accomplishments, and his impartiality & judgement, and so would everyone else.
> they were also exec's so I don't think there is any suggestion of abuse of power here.
Everyone reports to the CEO, directly or indirectly, and in this case the CEO is also a founder. The appearance of abuse of power here is plain-as-day.
There's so much coping going on in the comments here it's mind-boggling. Sleeping with your subordinates is enough to get fired just about anywhere.
It doesn't matter if there was an actual abuse of power, or if they were completely consenting adults.
When anyone in the company is fucking the boss and get a raise or promotion, or a good project, everyone in the company who isn't fucking the boss now have a legitimate grievance to sue the company over - that they are being passed over for these things because they aren't fucking the boss.
It doesn't even have to be true. The sheer possibility that it is true is cyanide.
This is part of every sexual harassment training 101 that any manager has ever gone through. (If you haven't gone through it, your employer's opening itself up to a lot of liability...)
> It's very likely his affairs were simply open secrets within the C suite.
There's a lot of people who usually know.
People with power think their farts don't smell or that the rest are stupid and don't notice or some don't care that people know as long as they keep their moths shut, or they get careless over time -- but lots of people eventually know.
Early in my career I shared an office with the mistress of a General Manager, she was on good terms with everybody in the office (kind of odd she was placed in the same office with nerdy devs she had zero work contact with) -- but everybody else hated her guts, can't really rember their grievances.
Anyway I used to catch glimpses of phisical contact between them and the guy divorced and they married.
Relationships with colleagues were encouraged with some limitations, perhaps that's why they were so non-chalant about it (though the guy being married back home was kind of gross even for our european open minds).
In the '70s a new manager transferred in. Some of the old hands pointed out that his wife was his second wife and former secretary. Back then, people talked, but there was no outrage.
I guess OpenAI and Anthropic IPOs are failing expectations plus open weights models which Nvidia supports and Jensen been super vocal about them and confronting anodes and Altman about dangers of IA have something to do with what we are seeing
It’s not just misconduct claims. It’s the same reason why house parties have a tendency to go a bit too late and then suddenly empty out as soon as one person leaves. Or why at conferences you might wait an uncomfortable amount of time for someone to ask the first question, but after that there’s a queue.
In a nutshell, nobody wants to be the first.
(possibly obligatory disclaimer: I’m not saying this to minimize harassment and abuse claims. More the opposite: I worry that perceiving this phenomenon as something specific to harassment and abuse allegations can become a pretense for dismissing them out of hand.)
I assume the inverse is the same idea: most people don't want to take the last bite from a plate of snacks? Usually after it winds down for a while you get another wave of claims.
Correlation isn’t causation always. Once there’s a scandal, more people start digging, and the more they dig, the more they find. The news cycle continues rewarding more information, so you keep getting more.
This happens all the time with news stories and doesn't require conspiracy theories. Once an initial story breaks, other journalists investigate (if they weren't already). No doubt Nvidia started investigating internally and employees will have leaked the findings.
There isn't really even any point in this third story from the point of view of any "coordinated attack". He's already resigned.
A shell game. This is the distraction portion. Then comes the switch, the reveal and the swipe. Watch the market indicators. Nobody buying and selling shares in a trillion-dollar company cares one iota about extramarital affairs. Something else is happening.
They might not care about affairs, but they are probably interested in the possibility that Nvidia circumvented US export controls, is being covertly influenced by China, and so on
First person who gets it. It’s 2026, there is no moral panic here. Shareholders don’t care. It’s all completely fake and orchestrated as cover for some other purpose (To offload shares or otherwise).
Are you serious? He had multiple affairs is what's going on. Including one with a spy. And people who wouldn't be believed before are now coming forward.
There's probably some mildly interesting risk-balancing that happened behind the scenes because the intel community apparently knew mid-2026 and only spilled the beans now, but this is entirely of Jensen's own doing. He confessed.
It's weird, right? You see the same thing in police investigations. Oh, they know some things early, then, later, release more information? We're not that dumb.
When a real scandal happens, everything we know or will ever know gets dropped all at once. Anything else and you know someone is pulling the strings. The question is who? My money is on the arrow of time.
A serial adulterer is revealed to have adulterated serially, and SV types are spilling oodles of ink attempting to justify loose morals and bad decision-making so long as it brought increased shareholder value.
I am reminded of the tv series "the shield". When it ends, our guy is asked "what all do you have to declare". I am paraphrasing.
Pretty sure the board asked the same question. Having finally been called to do their work, they can't just close the books without asking "what else do you have to declare" to both Jensen and at least all the direct reportees. And if there was a declaration, you can always find someone to leak it to the media.
Not saying that happened, just saying that it is likely such direct questions were asked and answered last few days.
It’s a common tactic to make sure the scandal stays on the front page and it’s untenable to try to stay on. Politicians do this all the time. Scandals happen constantly, it they’re saved for when they are most useful. Jensen is in politics, whether he realises it or not.
China may be behind it as an attempt to sabotage America’s economy. But I actually think more likely the Americans as Nvidia haven’t complied sufficiently.
I really feel for Jensen. He’s dedicated his life to Nvidia and really is heavily responsible for its success. It must be devastating to have to step away from it.
He admitted to an affair. An affair by definition is a bad thing.
You can be poly and sleep with multiple people with the consent of your partners and it’s not an affair.
An affair, being unfaithful, cheating, etc. are all terms used for someone who has breached the terms of their relationship. We don’t need to be slow to judge because he judged himself by using those terms.
You have no idea what the situation in his relationship was like at the time. You don’t know how his wife feels about it, you don’t even know if she knew about it. Be slow to judge.
His public apology included apologies to his wife and children for hurting them. It's reasonable to believe that he did in fact disrupt his family life.
Are you thinking somebody held a gun to his head and said sleep with this woman or I kill you? The guy consented to cheating, not just with a spy, but with people under his authority.
Accepting an $8 Billion deal from an exec at a company who was called out months ago for circumventing export controls on behalf of Chineses interests is a pretty damning circumstance.
Sleeping with that person and the other affairs are just icing on a shit cake.
No, but I think there is a financial motivation in coordinating the release of information to destroy him.
Reports that Lutnick and Trump knew about the spy situation for some time and allowed it to continue without informing Jensen goes a long way towards establishing a kind of coordination.
Once you start with the spy and national security angle, then you can get access to internal HR reports, and through these and media coordinating, a misrepresentation of the situation is doing the damage that was intended.
There is no public evidence that she was a spy, that Jensen revealed any secrets during the affair, or that Jensen was involved in any of the blackmarket dealings for GPUs. There is no evidence he exploited his power to have any affairs with anyone who works at nVidia either.
All thats left are two relationships he shouldnt have had with two nVidia employees and that is not criminal, or for many a reason to lose the company you basically created.
Meanwhile, its obvious that the commerce secretary worked with nVidia to slow roll the addition of shell companies where the blackmarket trades were happening. This is the most damning accusation, and if Jensens $25 million Trump ballroom donation was a payment to have them look the other way while nVidia knew they circumvented export controls, then that is a legitimate reason for him to resign. Because that is a series of criminal acts, and you know without a doubt that Lutnick, Trump and others were personally benefitting from this arrangement and is likely why they knew about the "spy" situation and did nothing.
But again, even this is just speculation and we wont know, maybe forever what really went on behind the scenes. Either way, it is a coordinated, well planned action to sort of drip a media narrative to get him out of the way.
It might just be that the one affair learned that she is not the only one and went public. Then the third one also learned that she is not the only one ...
I 10000x support a free and open press - but consider this - all media outlets - even the beset ones - still have a 'Tabloid' element.
They are looking for the scoop, the story, he hits, the likes.
The media moves in waves and narratives.
Consider that the lady here is in no way a 'spy' in the classical sense - she's a hustler trying to buy some GPUs and skirt sanctions rules.
But 'honey pot' and 'spy' and all of this plays into frankly a hint of sexism/Orientalism/racism; I say hint - it's not at the core of this story, but it fuels headlines.
Once a meme starts, it rolls like a snowball it becomes an 'pop culture event' and it's going to be perceived through the lens of 'headlines' not substance.
Having 'relations' with someone is none of our business. With staff? Then it becomes possibly an issue - but - not necessarily. 'Consenting Adults' are 'Consenting Adults' - again - power complicates but is not definitive.
Elon Musk has a bunch of wives around him that his staff juggle. He literally asks young women on social media to have his children for money. <== this alone should be a gigantic scandal.
But Elon has normalized his insanity - in much the same way that Trump can say completely insane things and there is no 'scandal' because there's no 'media wind'. It does not 'elicit' the concern.
Elon controls the board, nothing can happen from there, so there's no drama. If Elon's companies start to fumble - that will then creates scandal and stories.
There possibly could be a move, maybe by those in governance, to slow leak. It could even be a tactic by the CCP. But all of that is unlikely.
This is just 'secrets coming to bear'. Where there is smoke, there will be scrutiny, which causes panic, crazy actions, other things to come to light, bad decisions etc. - and the resulting entertainment.
A bit similar to the OpenAI board drama.
This is just 'the slightly dark underside of personal foibles' being 'hoisted into a narrative'.
And it could flip in an instant - if the staffers revolt and demand him back, the story will turn into one of redemption, salvation.
Obviously there is legitimacy here: CEOs should not be having relations with staff. Obviously! But everything is bent out of proportion.
It's not especially newsworthy that there are rumours a CEO is having an (apparently entirely consensual) affair with one of his employees. It becomes newsworthy if he's also been having an affair with a Chinese spy.
I don't think you can easily run "Jensen Huang had an intimate relationship with [an] employee, according to two people familiar with the matter" unless it's clearly a matter of public interest, which it becomes when it's apparently more than one and on the heels of the other story.
Alleged spy. That totally unsubstantiated claim from anonymous sources could as easily be a financially or politically motivated smear as the truth. The way the whole thing has turned into a media circus makes me skeptical to take any of it at face value.
I think that the JD Vance camp after the 2026 mid-terms, needs a way to distinguish themselves from Rubio, who has largely been an administration favorite and the VP handles tasks typically delegated to the Secretary of State. Between this which is still forming, and Vance reportedly being vocal about not going to war in Iran, there will be a few distinguishing bullet points. I can't imagine insiders didn't know that the man from one of the world's top two multi-trillion dollar companies was having multiple affairs that could easily be used to blackmail him.
As others have said I think it's a measure for the opportunists in government and OpenAI and Anthropic to get rid of open weights and Chinese models. Jensen Huang was advocating open weights.
Maybe this time next year using models other than Claude and OpenAI will be illegal somehow with nvidia kernel level implementations to block vram usage to granted to unsigned providers or something.
Yea, tech/security work shouldn't be surprised by this. When a big hole is found in a piece of software it's really common for a few more to crop up simply because a lot of people are looking at it.
Do we as an industry really not have the ability to comprehend that 1) you shouldn't be sleeping with your employees and 2) that no matter how much value you generate, there will be people who find that sort of behavior morally repugnant and that it can ruin your career if you engage in it?
Even people who don't particularly care about the moral aspect (a) may find him untrustworthy (if he's lying in his personal life why would you trust what he tells you in your business dealings) (b) may consider it a weakness that can be exploited against your shared business interests (he could be bribed or blackmailed into dealings which don't benefit the company, or embroil the company in legal problems) or (c) lose faith in his judgement, if he's willing to get himself into such a mess.
It does look coordinated, but that doesn’t mean it was pre-arranged.
When you see bird flocks or fish schools moving in coordinated ways, they didn’t arrange all that in advance. They’re observing each other and reacting in real time. Quite a lot of coordinated movements develop this way, among people as well as other animals.
A person who forgets that this type of coordination is possible might end up spending their life endlessly looking for the man behind the curtain in every moment of coordination they come across.
in all seriousness though, what is going on? everything here feels well timed and coordinated. were the powers that be just waiting for US midterms to pass? is there any relationship to the anthropic IPO? my tin foil hat is going to be working overtime these next few days
I mean it’s just much more of a favorable political environment for the board to investigate Huang. And journalists know that if there’s smoke, there’s likely fire. So it seems like a pretty natural pile-on if anything.
It is kinda weird that Jensen decided to resign so quickly though. I would’ve expected a longer investigation period involving both the board and Congress.
Democrats take charge
IPO almost out the door
Bubble about to pop
What people (and nations) would be able to come out clean in front of their audiences from the fallout of the above if the catalyst was Huang having an affair with an alleged Chinese spy, being interrogated by Warren, and the woke forcing him out of the company he built (whose interim CEO is female)
There’s a thread through all of that that props up a significant portion of Silicon Valley elite’s worldview…
My grandmother was using a similar saying, translated approximately: "there's never just 1 mouse in the barn". I'd bet these expressions have been common across the world for centuries.
Warren buffet didn't invent it either it's an old saying. I vaguely recall it from an insecticide commercial when I was a child but they probably didn't invent it either.
Not surprising its use has exploded in recent days..
Possibly Nathan Calvin on Twitter in August: If you find two ants in your kitchen, the best estimate of the total number of ants in your kitchen is not two
It's much much older. As a kid growing up in NY in the 90s, I heard many times the version of this saying, "one cockroach on the floor means one hundred behind the wall."
Completely tangential but I always find it interesting how different expressions become attached to specific contexts in people's heads.
"This old house as got good bones" is the realtor 'slaps roof of car' meme that seems to have caught on during the 2010s and peaked during COVID. Now I hear people mindlessly propagating it whenever they talk about renovating/buying an old home.
I'm sure that we'll be hearing this ants in the kitchen of the house with good bones thing forever now.
Fable 5.2 couldn't access the full DMN text (nor can I), but suggests the article is about "local TV journalists reacting to a report on minority hiring" and "Sanders" is probably a reporter named Bob Ray Sanders, a reporter in the region (who was later inducted to the National Association of Black Journalists' Hall of Fame). What he actually said is sadly paywalled in the archives.
They are more similar to "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action" because they include explicit low numeric information
It makes sense for cockroaches, which make it their business to hide from you.
It's not even true for ants. If you find two ants in the kitchen, they were just there by coincidence. Ants aren't concerned with whether you can see them; if they're interested in something in your kitchen, they'll show up by the hundreds to take it away, and they'll be impossible to miss.
"The man who has fed the chicken every day throughout its life at last wrings its neck instead, showing that more refined views as to the uniformity of nature would have been useful to the chicken."
-- Bertrand Russell, 1912
Point is, if you find two ants in the kitchen it's worth to investigate if there are more.
Blindly assuming there were more, like the original quote seems to suggest, will burn you sooner or later.
It's worthless anyway. A chicken who can see the future and act on it in any way that bothers the people around it is going to be killed, and better-domesticated chickens will be bred to replace it.
The chicken had long outsourced its brain to its owners. It didn’t have to look for food or fend off enemies for generations. Its food was provided, its safety was ensured by the owner. Leaving the yard would have gotten the chicken eaten by a coyote or a stray dog.
Even the dog guarding the chickens didn’t enjoy a better fate. At the first sign of illness, its vet recommended a cost efficient putting to sleep.
Those only useful, become discarded at the end of usefulness. Those only valuable can get sold or harvested. That’s why you have to be loved. Because everyone else can just upgrade their tools.
If you find a tip of iceberg above the water, there is an iceberg under the water as well. Maybe ants analogy is better.
Jokes apart, the leaders usually require almost the same mindset of a savage sailor who is on a mission to plunder the riches from the far away lands. They break the rules to the extent possible and exhibit highest levels of survival skills. Sometimes that mindset spills into personal life.
Youtube currently has some memes about Huang. One
simple one (bit silly) was where his face was overlaid
on the Austin Powers with the fook mi and fook you or
yu; I actually liked the Austin Powers movie, but the
overlay with Huang there was .... well. Cringey ... and
quite silly. But still. It shows that people like poking
fun about that. That resonates more quickly than other
criticism. NVIDIA is always a meme. I guess they are happier
with Huang-likes-the-women meme than the "we drove up the
RAM prices and you can not do anything about it, you
slaves!" or "NVIDIA won't work on Linux", which is still
kind of true. At the least my NVIDIA card does not work
well, the firmware is never recognized. We really need to
get rid of these companies, but that's evidently not easy.
They are like a mafia sitting on top of everyone else and
parasitizing from there.
I think it's easy not to seek women but when they throw themselves at you that's a different story... Maybe if the risk of adultery is too high it's better to get a divorce and stay divorced.
To a certain point I don't really care about how many subordinates it ends up being (something tells me there are more), but it does make all of the grindset quotes CEOs like Huang barf up all the more laughable.
> “I work every day. There’s not a day that goes by that I don’t work. And if I’m not working, I’m thinking about work.”
> “I wake up at 5am, and the moment I wake up, I start working… I’m asleep probably by 9:30pm.
A lot of people have said Nvidia are crazy to get rid of Huang, that he's a singular irreplaceable talent. What if, perhaps, he's not all he's made out to be?
The president and ruling party claims we are/have always been a Christian nation, and that traditional Christian family values should dictate every day life. Looking through that lens, I’m shocked there’s not more outrage.
I think people would be shocked to find out just how common "don't ask, don't tell" is among couples, especially among the rich, famous, and powerful. Everyone ganged up on Jada Smith until Will admitted he too sought outside "entanglements." Most couples who do this just hide it well enough, and it's only a problem when one of them is caught.
Not all, very likely not even most, of course, do this, and it's not always truly mutual or healthy, but surprise surprise, not every couple wants strict monogamy. They just don't want society to judge them for it.
And this is why I have a lot of sympathy for Lori Huang, regardless - she may have been ok with some degree of non-monogamy, but I bet she didn't want it on the front page of the New York Times.
We can't know if they had a talked open relationship. It's pretty common to hear about this kind of arrangements on high-level C-suite or government positions.
Life kinda works a bit differently when most of the time you’re not spending it with your significant other. Both parties have needs, so it becomes more likely to have such arrangements and talks.
You are correct, but the signs point to there wasn't one. If you have been in Silicon Valley for any length of time, you will learn about people who have open/ethical/consensual non-monogamous relationships. Some of these people are executives or in other high profile positions. Possibly the reason you didn't hear about this as much, was there wasn't social media or tech press with a need to feed an ever increasingly fast news cycle. Another reason is that being in an ethical, non-monogamous relationship usually means you are interacting with people who are in similar agreements. This is what would make it work.
The apology letter makes me think he and his wife were not in such an arrangement; the content of the letter would have quite different. He could have stated their arrangement but apologized about lack of judgment mixing personal and business life in such a way that it caused perception issues.
Is it so bad? He founded one of history's most successful companies in one of the most exciting sectors on the planet and ran it for 33 years. He's 63.
The only thing that would actually be bad is if his wife left him, which we don't know is happening yet. Some women accept the "risk" (to put it tastelessly) of marrying a hundred-billionaire, and stick it out.
Depends on what he values, I don't think I'd be any happier with 150bn than maybe 100m, they're both large enough that I couldn't possibly see myself spending it. Not with this specific case, but I often see people saying/implying people must be happy because they're rich/founded a successful company/achieved something great/<insert desirable thing here>.
I guess people often think the things they imagine making themselves happy would make someone else who has that happy, and I just don't think that's the case that often. I don't think money buys happiness after a point, a certain amount gets rid of a lot of discomfort and stress and brings relief and security, a bit more can buy some happiness, after that it's just number go up.
Who was that comedian that said something along of "I'd rather be depressed in an Rolls Royce than in a Honda"... Money doesn't buy happiness, but it removes the worry of where you are going to sleep tonight.
There is an obvious pattern for these high level executive roles. They are all workaholics, they are not particularly loyal, they all have loose moral compasses, they don't have any clear line between work and their personal life, and they treat relationships like business arrangements.
This feels so common that I would not even be quick to assume this is some sort of unknown betrayal to his family. One of the revelations about the Gates' lives was that Bill's promiscuity was apparently baked into their marriage agreement. At this level, your marriage might just be like a fixed mailing address for someone who has multiple homes.
Not to excuse this in any way. But these are the personalities of medieval lords and kings.
He would spend a week with a special friend every year (they'd hike together?), and this was in his marriage contract. That woman is now a VC. You can easily find out more if you google this.
I think "lots" is vastly overstating it. Yes, there are women who would be ok with that, but in my experience they are greatly in the minority. Most women (and men to be fair) do not like if they don't have an exclusive claim on their spouse, even if it's being done in the open.
Sure, I would not lightly or unthinkingly be okay with a potential husband entering into such an arrangement, but I also wouldn’t consider anyone as a potential husband if I would never allow them it for their lack of communication groundwork or trustworthy straightforwardness. If I have so little faith in him coming home to me after a once a year camping trip that clearly never became more before me, then I have no business marrying him in the first place! Sure, I may or may not like it — this varies rather sharply based on how readily they can bear a few days of jealousy with grace and good cheer — but marriage is no more about avoiding “do not like” than it is about confirming to the handfasted stereotypes of American monogamy and cheating. One campaign trip a year is three nines of reliability with a scheduled maintenance window rather than unpredictable outages and months of undiscovered foreign key violations corrupting the relational store.
Take a lesson from tech: Three nines of uptime is quite sufficient to build something amazing and valuable to the right customers. We women (and anyone of any gender!) don’t have to implement Six Sigma to enter into a monogamous, exclusive marriage, but at least here in the U.S. we do care a great deal about proper outage notifications and root cause analyses and considering how to schedule and conduct future outages to minimize surprise harms.
Thanks! It stemmed from a thought about how “always” is not 100.0% but more like 99% in human being things, and trying to convey that people operate at varying levels of ‘always’, which bridged sideways to six sigma monogamy. It’s going to be a fun analogy to work with for sure :)
There is something in it for the wife. The world is a bit more "House of Cards" than some people assume. Aside from the French and a few others, western cultures seem almost uniquely dishonest about the tacit assumption that successful men will have mistresses. This isn't a new thing. Warren Buffett was essentially married to two women most of his life and no one cared.
Many wives highly value the accrued status of being formally married to a high-status person. You can take half the money but the social status doesn't follow. No one cares about a billionaire divorcee with no status beyond a bank account.
I don't know about their specific arrangement, but in some relationships, having other partners is not only accepted, but actively used to reinforce the primary relationships.
If you accept your partner has those urges, you can either treat it antagonistically and have those urges become a problem in your relationship or you can absorb them into your relationship and have it be strengthened by them.
You either become the one being cheated on and weakened or the one in control with a relationship strong enough to not be threatened by some side action, which in turn makes you a rarer and more valuable mate.
Ok we’re back to pitchforking (possible) open relationships now? You know very little about their dynamics. You lack information and frankly any justification to judge.
I'm not pitchforking the concept, if everyone involved is honest with each other.
However, the reality is the vast majority of people are not okay with open relationships. Call it 20% of relationships, which I think is generous. It's fishy that at the CEO level the percentage of these "open relationships" is close to 100%.
> I would not even be quick to assume this is some sort of unknown betrayal to his family
But (unless "unknown" is doing a lot of work in your sentence) Huang literally said this in his letter to NVidia employees: "I was unfaithful to my wife. My actions hurt her and our children. There is no excuse for what I did. I am deeply sorry."
Otherwise, I agree with a lot of what you said. In the 2000-2015 timeframe, I really idolized a lot of these successful tech leaders - they seemed incredibly smart, hard-working, and talented (though also of course lucky). But over time I came to the realization that many of them just fundamentally think very differently than I do, and I view that other way of thinking with disgust. The main issue is it seems like nearly all of their relationships are transactional, and they have a lack of empathy and willingness to be ruthless that is simply anathema to me.
Jensen and Lori met in early 1980s or so when they were 17 and 19 years old respectively. Moreover they got married in 1985, 13 years before Nvidia was even founded. Quite different from Bill and Melinda hooking up after Microsoft don't you think ? Not to mention his apology.
Think about what women are attracted to as well. Powerful man with huge amounts of money. Optimal for survival and a good life. The women around that person would want to be with him.
At how many $billion of market value should a board just figure that it's a cost of doing business to hire retired spooks to keep track of the CEO's personal life, and ensure that he has a pipeline of well-paid, background-checked, NDA-signed mistresses available to divert his eyes from the employees and spies?
I wonder if he followed a modern trend and was on TRT, it seems like a pattern for celebrity/powerful men of age these days: get on TRT, get in shape, cheat on your wife.
I always got the impression that it was somewhat of an open secret that most billionaires had soft harems of sorts, usually tacitly understood but never publicly addressed, and that the apparent outrage at affairs/scandals at this level is a sort of charade of allegiance to social norms to enforce the facade that standards of propriety apply even at the highest levels.
You’ve misread the room. Absolutely no one cares about the infidelity. One of the affairs has been public knowledge for months.
The outrage is about new reporting that one affair was with a potential Chinese asset, and the other affairs are more entertainment and/or evidence of bad leadership than anything else.
Americans will also balk at sexual relations with a professional underling where it’s difficult to establish whether truly unconditional consent was given.
In my humble opinion the issue shouldn't be their perceived promiscuity, but their bad judgement in sleeping with a person from a client company (that might be affiliated with a country you can't export your products too), and colleagues that are not your peers.
For me, this is a lapse of judgement for the CEO and one of the founders of one of the biggest corporation's globally.
And perhaps creating a web of funding with clients that boosts the world economy to the point that other services may suffer, and that part of this web is selling a product illegally, and that when this comes to light questions will be asked, including how much of the web is funded illegally (maybe not much) and perhaps the new management will disentangle this web and the butterfly flaps it's wings.
I think there's a lot more shady stuff that's going to come out. The XBOX deal had a lot of intrigue. Especially now that we know the types of behaviors Bill, Jensen engaged in.
319 comments
[ 1.8 ms ] story [ 91.5 ms ] threadSomeone powerful or a group of people did not want open weight AI models and Nvidia GPUs being accessible or sold in China and either:
1) Wanted him (Jensen) to stop selling GPUs in China and had his affairs recorded and used as dirt against him as selling GPUs into China also threatened the AI labs.
2) Insiders (and spies) used the affairs against Jensen to knowingly smuggle Nvidia GPUs into China from Singapore (despite the export issue) with too many of them that knew, and that leaked to the wrong person.
Not even China wants Nvidia GPUs and urges chinese AI companies to use homegrown Huawei GPUs. The chinese AI labs still choose Nvidia GPUs over Huawei anyway.
Because, the powerful men can hide things for a long time, right up until they are no longer powerful.
That's like the entire point of #MeToo. Women are very upset with how much known misbehavior was going on that was kept hush because the men involved were in positions of power, and people preferred keeping that power structure stable over literally putting people doing sex crimes to justice.
What you are seeing is that when women feel like they will be listened to when they come out with a story like this, they will.
That, and there's also the simple effect of "A rich person is suddenly getting dragged through the media, perfect time to share your own gossip if you have some"
You can't blame this on a conspiracy when such simple incentives will cause the same phenomenon, and we have ample examples of exactly that happening.
You understand that the AI labs in the US have taken a lot of money from thousands of investors. They don't benefit whatsoever in losing their investment to powerful open weight AI models that undermine closed weight ones especially chinese AI models that are rapidly catching up to them.
Nvidia was investing the open weight model ecosystem after realizing that the AI labs were moving off of their GPUs and using in-house chips. Jensen made sure that some Chinese AI labs were getting Nvidia GPUs in order to slow them down in relying or building their domestic ones.
Why would someone who invested a lot of money into any of the >1TN+ AI labs accept the risk of a chinese AI lab undermining them in their future IPO plans?
Jensen was already being blackmailed by the Trump administration for the past year, which Trump all but admits openly here:
https://youtu.be/m2aC8lAOQbg?si=rqqSliGdLF4_Q663&t=1460
@24:20 if the link doesn't maintain the timestamp on your platform.
He doesn't name Jensen, but in hindsight with everything that has come out (including information on the timing of the Rubio memo) he is obviously talking about him and threatening him with jail to become a yes-man, and Jensen complied.
So IMO the real question isn't who is blackmailing Jensen (we know that), the question is: when he was already complying with blackmail for a year, who decided to burn him as an asset? Did it come from the people who were blackmailing him, or an external source? And who gains/loses by the loss of leverage they already had on him?
A lesson, apparently, for everyone asking "what the big deal is".
If ever you wanted to understand the meaning of the word "liability", here it is.
"Coordinated hits", as you put it, have as their prerequisite the creation of a "liability".
As the British police are fond of saying in cold case appeals: allegiances change.
His security detail is also no longer worried about retribution and are likely complying with an internal investigation.
It's very likely his affairs were simply open secrets within the C suite.
We're not talking about sexual violence or harassment though, it's not about “being believed”.
... what?
It's much more likely that some people knew and journalists went around asking people.
It's surprising how far tittle-tattle can travel.
That's long enough ago that it seems likely that Huang got to know her in her current role. But if the affair started earlier than 2017, there is the suggestion of abuse of power. Not with Powell as victim, but everyone else who hoped to get that role instead of her
1. Stick to the facts - speculation helps no-one.
2. Don't assume to fight on behalf of people you don't know.
For example there appears to be an assumption that his wife has been deeply wronged and she is the victim. This may well be the case. but it also might not be. That part of this story is a private matter for them and not helped by speculation and assumptions.
In fact I'd go further - you have in effect just accused Powell of being promoted by sleeping with the boss based entirely on speculation. Not sure that's helpful either.
He might also feel he needed to do it for many reasons, some more self-serving than others.
My speculation is purely for its explaining or predictive power on the question why all of this is coming out at once, and who's behind revealing all this. I favor the "conspiracy" version (someone wants him gone and exposes his real secrets in the most damaging way). But if we consider that this might all be organically triggered by the revelation of the spy affair we can't discount that the numerically largest group that feels wronged by his affairs might be employees that were disadvantaged whenever affair partners got special treatment
Whether or not it’s the case, if the behavior is known to others in the company it also creates a hostile work environment for ambitious female employees who are not at Powell’s level but hope to reach it.
Everyone reports to the CEO, directly or indirectly, and in this case the CEO is also a founder. The appearance of abuse of power here is plain-as-day.
There's so much coping going on in the comments here it's mind-boggling. Sleeping with your subordinates is enough to get fired just about anywhere.
Also note that is different from having an opinion about Jensen himself.
So it's perfectly possible for me to simultaneously think he has done something wrong, but not decide on X or Y were 'wronged'.
Not the same thing.
When anyone in the company is fucking the boss and get a raise or promotion, or a good project, everyone in the company who isn't fucking the boss now have a legitimate grievance to sue the company over - that they are being passed over for these things because they aren't fucking the boss.
It doesn't even have to be true. The sheer possibility that it is true is cyanide.
This is part of every sexual harassment training 101 that any manager has ever gone through. (If you haven't gone through it, your employer's opening itself up to a lot of liability...)
There's a lot of people who usually know.
People with power think their farts don't smell or that the rest are stupid and don't notice or some don't care that people know as long as they keep their moths shut, or they get careless over time -- but lots of people eventually know.
Early in my career I shared an office with the mistress of a General Manager, she was on good terms with everybody in the office (kind of odd she was placed in the same office with nerdy devs she had zero work contact with) -- but everybody else hated her guts, can't really rember their grievances. Anyway I used to catch glimpses of phisical contact between them and the guy divorced and they married.
Relationships with colleagues were encouraged with some limitations, perhaps that's why they were so non-chalant about it (though the guy being married back home was kind of gross even for our european open minds).
In a nutshell, nobody wants to be the first.
(possibly obligatory disclaimer: I’m not saying this to minimize harassment and abuse claims. More the opposite: I worry that perceiving this phenomenon as something specific to harassment and abuse allegations can become a pretense for dismissing them out of hand.)
There isn't really even any point in this third story from the point of view of any "coordinated attack". He's already resigned.
A shell game. This is the distraction portion. Then comes the switch, the reveal and the swipe. Watch the market indicators. Nobody buying and selling shares in a trillion-dollar company cares one iota about extramarital affairs. Something else is happening.
There's probably some mildly interesting risk-balancing that happened behind the scenes because the intel community apparently knew mid-2026 and only spilled the beans now, but this is entirely of Jensen's own doing. He confessed.
mid-2025*
When a real scandal happens, everything we know or will ever know gets dropped all at once. Anything else and you know someone is pulling the strings. The question is who? My money is on the arrow of time.
Pretty sure the board asked the same question. Having finally been called to do their work, they can't just close the books without asking "what else do you have to declare" to both Jensen and at least all the direct reportees. And if there was a declaration, you can always find someone to leak it to the media.
Not saying that happened, just saying that it is likely such direct questions were asked and answered last few days.
him sleeping around, hth
It’s a common tactic to make sure the scandal stays on the front page and it’s untenable to try to stay on. Politicians do this all the time. Scandals happen constantly, it they’re saved for when they are most useful. Jensen is in politics, whether he realises it or not.
China may be behind it as an attempt to sabotage America’s economy. But I actually think more likely the Americans as Nvidia haven’t complied sufficiently.
I really feel for Jensen. He’s dedicated his life to Nvidia and really is heavily responsible for its success. It must be devastating to have to step away from it.
You can be poly and sleep with multiple people with the consent of your partners and it’s not an affair.
An affair, being unfaithful, cheating, etc. are all terms used for someone who has breached the terms of their relationship. We don’t need to be slow to judge because he judged himself by using those terms.
Sleeping with that person and the other affairs are just icing on a shit cake.
Reports that Lutnick and Trump knew about the spy situation for some time and allowed it to continue without informing Jensen goes a long way towards establishing a kind of coordination.
Once you start with the spy and national security angle, then you can get access to internal HR reports, and through these and media coordinating, a misrepresentation of the situation is doing the damage that was intended.
There is no public evidence that she was a spy, that Jensen revealed any secrets during the affair, or that Jensen was involved in any of the blackmarket dealings for GPUs. There is no evidence he exploited his power to have any affairs with anyone who works at nVidia either.
All thats left are two relationships he shouldnt have had with two nVidia employees and that is not criminal, or for many a reason to lose the company you basically created.
Meanwhile, its obvious that the commerce secretary worked with nVidia to slow roll the addition of shell companies where the blackmarket trades were happening. This is the most damning accusation, and if Jensens $25 million Trump ballroom donation was a payment to have them look the other way while nVidia knew they circumvented export controls, then that is a legitimate reason for him to resign. Because that is a series of criminal acts, and you know without a doubt that Lutnick, Trump and others were personally benefitting from this arrangement and is likely why they knew about the "spy" situation and did nothing.
But again, even this is just speculation and we wont know, maybe forever what really went on behind the scenes. Either way, it is a coordinated, well planned action to sort of drip a media narrative to get him out of the way.
Jensen was not on the Epstein list. That omission is now coming back to haunt him.
I 10000x support a free and open press - but consider this - all media outlets - even the beset ones - still have a 'Tabloid' element.
They are looking for the scoop, the story, he hits, the likes.
The media moves in waves and narratives.
Consider that the lady here is in no way a 'spy' in the classical sense - she's a hustler trying to buy some GPUs and skirt sanctions rules.
But 'honey pot' and 'spy' and all of this plays into frankly a hint of sexism/Orientalism/racism; I say hint - it's not at the core of this story, but it fuels headlines.
Once a meme starts, it rolls like a snowball it becomes an 'pop culture event' and it's going to be perceived through the lens of 'headlines' not substance.
Having 'relations' with someone is none of our business. With staff? Then it becomes possibly an issue - but - not necessarily. 'Consenting Adults' are 'Consenting Adults' - again - power complicates but is not definitive.
Elon Musk has a bunch of wives around him that his staff juggle. He literally asks young women on social media to have his children for money. <== this alone should be a gigantic scandal.
But Elon has normalized his insanity - in much the same way that Trump can say completely insane things and there is no 'scandal' because there's no 'media wind'. It does not 'elicit' the concern.
Elon controls the board, nothing can happen from there, so there's no drama. If Elon's companies start to fumble - that will then creates scandal and stories.
There possibly could be a move, maybe by those in governance, to slow leak. It could even be a tactic by the CCP. But all of that is unlikely.
This is just 'secrets coming to bear'. Where there is smoke, there will be scrutiny, which causes panic, crazy actions, other things to come to light, bad decisions etc. - and the resulting entertainment.
A bit similar to the OpenAI board drama.
This is just 'the slightly dark underside of personal foibles' being 'hoisted into a narrative'.
And it could flip in an instant - if the staffers revolt and demand him back, the story will turn into one of redemption, salvation.
Obviously there is legitimacy here: CEOs should not be having relations with staff. Obviously! But everything is bent out of proportion.
I don't think you can easily run "Jensen Huang had an intimate relationship with [an] employee, according to two people familiar with the matter" unless it's clearly a matter of public interest, which it becomes when it's apparently more than one and on the heels of the other story.
Maybe this time next year using models other than Claude and OpenAI will be illegal somehow with nvidia kernel level implementations to block vram usage to granted to unsigned providers or something.
Media focus works in waves.
Do we as an industry really not have the ability to comprehend that 1) you shouldn't be sleeping with your employees and 2) that no matter how much value you generate, there will be people who find that sort of behavior morally repugnant and that it can ruin your career if you engage in it?
When you see bird flocks or fish schools moving in coordinated ways, they didn’t arrange all that in advance. They’re observing each other and reacting in real time. Quite a lot of coordinated movements develop this way, among people as well as other animals.
A person who forgets that this type of coordination is possible might end up spending their life endlessly looking for the man behind the curtain in every moment of coordination they come across.
Two affairs is a pattern.
Three affairs is just funny.
And frankly at this point, where nothing surprises you anymore we should probably just enjoy some stupid pictures with captions
in all seriousness though, what is going on? everything here feels well timed and coordinated. were the powers that be just waiting for US midterms to pass? is there any relationship to the anthropic IPO? my tin foil hat is going to be working overtime these next few days
- The affair(s) were so badly hidden that they became obvious once one was exposed
- High profile CEO of one of the biggest companies in the world means a lot of eyes
- something akin to the Streisand effect keeps things in the news cycle
At that point it was probably just a matter of time until the rest came out.
It is kinda weird that Jensen decided to resign so quickly though. I would’ve expected a longer investigation period involving both the board and Congress.
What people (and nations) would be able to come out clean in front of their audiences from the fallout of the above if the catalyst was Huang having an affair with an alleged Chinese spy, being interrogated by Warren, and the woke forcing him out of the company he built (whose interim CEO is female)
There’s a thread through all of that that props up a significant portion of Silicon Valley elite’s worldview…
We have to figure out where this comes from. It's so recent! https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49828285
https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/1989.html
"In a difficult business, no sooner is one problem solved than another surfaces - never is there just one cockroach in the kitchen."
Not surprising its use has exploded in recent days..
August 5th about Open AI:
https://x.com/_NathanCalvin/status/2084856543561093535
September 4th.. still about Open AI:
https://x.com/_NathanCalvin/status/2095854095139537064
November 11th.. Alex Lawsen on Twitter, referencing Nathan's post (above):
https://x.com/lxrjl/status/2120640689620861335
"This old house as got good bones" is the realtor 'slaps roof of car' meme that seems to have caught on during the 2010s and peaked during COVID. Now I hear people mindlessly propagating it whenever they talk about renovating/buying an old home.
I'm sure that we'll be hearing this ants in the kitchen of the house with good bones thing forever now.
Fable 5.2 couldn't access the full DMN text (nor can I), but suggests the article is about "local TV journalists reacting to a report on minority hiring" and "Sanders" is probably a reporter named Bob Ray Sanders, a reporter in the region (who was later inducted to the National Association of Black Journalists' Hall of Fame). What he actually said is sadly paywalled in the archives.
https://www.reddit.com/r/QuotesPorn/comments/9uu7wp/troubles...
It's not even true for ants. If you find two ants in the kitchen, they were just there by coincidence. Ants aren't concerned with whether you can see them; if they're interested in something in your kitchen, they'll show up by the hundreds to take it away, and they'll be impossible to miss.
-- Bertrand Russell, 1912
Point is, if you find two ants in the kitchen it's worth to investigate if there are more. Blindly assuming there were more, like the original quote seems to suggest, will burn you sooner or later.
As someone who's had to suffer through a lot of data visualization, unless the chicken is able to act on this insight, it's probably worthless.
Even the dog guarding the chickens didn’t enjoy a better fate. At the first sign of illness, its vet recommended a cost efficient putting to sleep.
Those only useful, become discarded at the end of usefulness. Those only valuable can get sold or harvested. That’s why you have to be loved. Because everyone else can just upgrade their tools.
But so is comparing humans to chickens or ants.
Jokes apart, the leaders usually require almost the same mindset of a savage sailor who is on a mission to plunder the riches from the far away lands. They break the rules to the extent possible and exhibit highest levels of survival skills. Sometimes that mindset spills into personal life.
- Lao Tzu
They are like a mafia sitting on top of everyone else and parasitizing from there.
> “I work every day. There’s not a day that goes by that I don’t work. And if I’m not working, I’m thinking about work.”
> “I wake up at 5am, and the moment I wake up, I start working… I’m asleep probably by 9:30pm.
https://www.startuparchive.org/p/jensen-huang-there-s-hard-w...
A lot of people have said Nvidia are crazy to get rid of Huang, that he's a singular irreplaceable talent. What if, perhaps, he's not all he's made out to be?
They’re not. He can fuck half of the company, for all I care, as long as it is all consensual and not enforced by power dynamics.
Maybe he should only be allowed to fuck to fuck ATI C-levels or something? Or maybe Bill Gates?
These two links make me think otherwise:
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/im-a-piece-of-sh---jensen-huangs-l...
https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/a-message-to-our-company
Not all, very likely not even most, of course, do this, and it's not always truly mutual or healthy, but surprise surprise, not every couple wants strict monogamy. They just don't want society to judge them for it.
How do you know?
These make me think otherwise:
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/im-a-piece-of-sh---jensen-huangs-l...
https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/a-message-to-our-company
Just like in some circles you have to be religious no matter what.
The apology letter makes me think he and his wife were not in such an arrangement; the content of the letter would have quite different. He could have stated their arrangement but apologized about lack of judgment mixing personal and business life in such a way that it caused perception issues.
The only thing that would actually be bad is if his wife left him, which we don't know is happening yet. Some women accept the "risk" (to put it tastelessly) of marrying a hundred-billionaire, and stick it out.
I guess people often think the things they imagine making themselves happy would make someone else who has that happy, and I just don't think that's the case that often. I don't think money buys happiness after a point, a certain amount gets rid of a lot of discomfort and stress and brings relief and security, a bit more can buy some happiness, after that it's just number go up.
He's also spent his life building a large, very influential company.
Could it be that those are the things he values?
Would be investigation ending in jail time.
- Hacker News
- Also Hacker News
It's like shaking a chicken coop.
This feels so common that I would not even be quick to assume this is some sort of unknown betrayal to his family. One of the revelations about the Gates' lives was that Bill's promiscuity was apparently baked into their marriage agreement. At this level, your marriage might just be like a fixed mailing address for someone who has multiple homes.
Not to excuse this in any way. But these are the personalities of medieval lords and kings.
Are there details on this? Yes, I do like the sordid gossip.
I think "lots" is vastly overstating it. Yes, there are women who would be ok with that, but in my experience they are greatly in the minority. Most women (and men to be fair) do not like if they don't have an exclusive claim on their spouse, even if it's being done in the open.
That’s just because you’re poor.
> Most women (and men to be fair) do not like if they don't have an exclusive claim on their spouse, even if it's being done in the open.
That’s because it is frowned upon to declare something like this publicly.
Take a lesson from tech: Three nines of uptime is quite sufficient to build something amazing and valuable to the right customers. We women (and anyone of any gender!) don’t have to implement Six Sigma to enter into a monogamous, exclusive marriage, but at least here in the U.S. we do care a great deal about proper outage notifications and root cause analyses and considering how to schedule and conduct future outages to minimize surprise harms.
There is something in it for the wife. The world is a bit more "House of Cards" than some people assume. Aside from the French and a few others, western cultures seem almost uniquely dishonest about the tacit assumption that successful men will have mistresses. This isn't a new thing. Warren Buffett was essentially married to two women most of his life and no one cared.
Many wives highly value the accrued status of being formally married to a high-status person. You can take half the money but the social status doesn't follow. No one cares about a billionaire divorcee with no status beyond a bank account.
If you accept your partner has those urges, you can either treat it antagonistically and have those urges become a problem in your relationship or you can absorb them into your relationship and have it be strengthened by them.
You either become the one being cheated on and weakened or the one in control with a relationship strong enough to not be threatened by some side action, which in turn makes you a rarer and more valuable mate.
However, the reality is the vast majority of people are not okay with open relationships. Call it 20% of relationships, which I think is generous. It's fishy that at the CEO level the percentage of these "open relationships" is close to 100%.
You've lost me here.
But (unless "unknown" is doing a lot of work in your sentence) Huang literally said this in his letter to NVidia employees: "I was unfaithful to my wife. My actions hurt her and our children. There is no excuse for what I did. I am deeply sorry."
Otherwise, I agree with a lot of what you said. In the 2000-2015 timeframe, I really idolized a lot of these successful tech leaders - they seemed incredibly smart, hard-working, and talented (though also of course lucky). But over time I came to the realization that many of them just fundamentally think very differently than I do, and I view that other way of thinking with disgust. The main issue is it seems like nearly all of their relationships are transactional, and they have a lack of empathy and willingness to be ruthless that is simply anathema to me.
- Very few people actually need TRT;
- If you take TRT without needing to, you're falling into a dependency trap;
- If you do need TRT and take it, not everything is roses and rainbows.
The outrage is about new reporting that one affair was with a potential Chinese asset, and the other affairs are more entertainment and/or evidence of bad leadership than anything else.
Which one? I think you're exaggerating. There may have been unconfirmed rumours and gossip in some circles but that's about it.
The 'asset' thing what drew scrutiny, its not why he is being fired.
For me, this is a lapse of judgement for the CEO and one of the founders of one of the biggest corporation's globally.
Recession?
I think there's a lot more shady stuff that's going to come out. The XBOX deal had a lot of intrigue. Especially now that we know the types of behaviors Bill, Jensen engaged in.
Elon gets a pass because he's normalized his behaviour and he can't be ousted, which I think is a bad double standard.
When staff is involved it's going to matter but conflict of interest does not necessarily mean wrongdoing.