The difference between Musk and Huang is that Musk has engineered such control of his companies through dual class listings that there really is no one who can fire him. Having said that, people are very openly talking about the fact that Musk is going to spend the next couple of years spending quality time with the US congress explaining in minute detail why he's not a traitor.

The other big difference between the two is that after the last election, Musk (with Trumps help) essentially put himself in a position where he basically controlled the federal government for 6 months and did whatever he wanted with no consequences. It's a lot easier to commit crimes when you fire all the people who are trying to stop you..

I think the point is that whether he did or didn't, there's so much smoke now, that Nvidia is going to be spending the next few years getting drilled by absolutely every law enforcement agency and government. Even if it genuinely turns out that nothing even slightly bad happened, it's quite damaging the amount of scrutiny Nvidia is going to be under for the foreseeable future.

> Nvidia is going to be spending the next few years getting drilled by absolutely every law enforcement agency and government.

Sounds like this was known or suspected at the highest levels of the administration (Rubio was discussing it per recent reporting). So the question becomes: did Nvidia use a cut out to knowingly avoid the export ban, and if so, did the administration know this?

Yes, they did. Trump talked about an AI CEO committing a crime in the 60 minutes episode, and it is speculated that he was referring to Jensen. And Marco Rubio was frustrated and kept flagging it, but Trump and Lutnick squashed any investigations into it.

Especially after Democrats now control both House and Senate, that too by a wide margin.

I see a lot of this at my company too - everyone re-inventing the same ideas over and over. I wonder how much people actually adopt other teams' implementation of this. In my experience I'm bombarded with a thousand different iterations of these things that everyone wants to advertise as a sort of "Look at me! I'm so AI!" but I simply don't have time to evaluate every different persons variation on these things, I certainly don't have time to really thoroughly benchmark them, and from experience a lot what I needed a carefully tuned skill to achieve 6 months ago is trivial for a better tuned agent today. I'm literally getting to the point where even my own skills are beginning to bit-rot.

They're offering about $65Bn, of which about $1.8Bn is from existing stock holders. That's a tiny amount of shares from existing stock holders and probably not anyone who works at the company.

See my other comment, I believe it’s the 7 founders.

It doesn't quite work like that. You don't go off and find some super smart person who can easily get a job at Nvidia and tell them "Hey you, go work for this company". You find someone who already works at Nvidia, and you bump into them at their kids' little league game, and you get chatting and build a rapport and over time you build trust and before you know, you've got a trusted source inside Nvidia. They don't even need to know they're a plant. And then, if you really do need something more than information you can go further. But you start with someone already at the company and you target them, rather than the other way around.

And that's not even talking about the less clandestine methods of just ringing their General Counsel and saying "Hey buddy we're the US government we need X Y Z".

There are just some things that as the head of one of the world's largest companies you can't do. If Jensen Huang doesn't realise the geo-political importance of his chips, then he shouldn't be in the job. But we know he does because he spends all his time hanging around the white house lobbying Trump to let him sell his chips to America's geopolitical rivals.

> If Jensen Huang doesn't realise the geo-political importance of his chips

The chips he wanted to sell direct to China?

This is one of the things that makes me negative on AI. Before AI, no one would have done this. Because it's a huge amount of effort and a total waste of time. Now we have AI, we have this explosion in people going off and doing all these pointless activities.

What do we gain from a plethora of SPSS-alike tools? Nothing. There's literally no explanation on this page about why anyone who uses SPSS would want to use this. But it's "100% Safe Rust". Yes, that's a feature that someone who likes rust wants, not what someone who uses SPSS wants.

What do we lose by fracturing all academic statistical analysis into a dozen different tools instead of 1? Lots!

It's not even clear the person creating this even intends for anyone to use it. So (a) why are they doing it and (b) how do you even know if it actually works if absolutely no one is using it. In fact the danger now is someone who doesn't know the author is just an AI slop dilletante comes along looking for an SPSS-like tool and makes the mistake of trying to use it.

Is there really any difference between this and the people posting AI slop onto their reddit accounts. It's just raising the noise floor to the point where we're going to have to essentially shut down the public internet, everything of value will move to closed spaces.

I'm extremely on the other side - it's not about what we gain, but what we don't lose. If there's even one person with a dataset they can't process easily without a proprietary tool, why shouldn't this exist?

I'm extremely happy every time a closed format falls. Whether it's this one, Sibelius music scores, records from medical devices, data series from scientific measurements, or something else. Every one of them stopped me from doing something in the past (not on a technical level but "it's not worth spending a month on this") and I'll support efforts like this.

If you want to advocate for open source alternative statistics software, sure, there are plenty of those - you can find half a dozen with a quick Google. None of them are prioritizing Rust Safeness, and they have a hell of a lot more support than "Here's something I vibe coded, I can't actually program so if you have a problem don't ask me"

And are any of those drop in replacements that can handle the existing format

Sorry, but this really comes across as demonstrating a substantial degree of entitlement. What is the purpose? Easy. A student is trained to use SPSS for their thesis work. They may be given a sitewise license from their university, but only for one device. Then after their training, they lose access to SPSS, but want to do that analysis in their workplace.

Proprietary software, especially at these prices, cause all kinds of issues. SPSS is one of the software packages that has a sizeable audience of people crying out for a true open source alternative. Just because you have the money to afford these things, does not mean that others do.

Also, if you are referring to the similarly named ArtCraft suite as a "pointless activity" then you are really out of touch.

If it's anything like the code it generates for me, it's thousands of lines of throwaway slop for a dashboard I needed to vizualize something. Or if it's on code that is actually important it's a single line fix with 10 lines of comments explaining the diff (not explaining the new behaviour that someone might want to see, explaining the diff vs the old behaviour that no one coming to that code in the future will ever care about)

In fact it would be far more interesting if it happened over the course of hours/days/months, because that would be an indication that they managed to remain undetected for a long period of time.

It's easy to vibe code a kind of messy thing that works, very had to maintain and improve pure vibed stuff.

Is it actually hard to maintain a REST wrapper though? I think it is actually quite easy to maintain and improve something as simple as this as a pure vibe code project. I do it all the time

Yes, for pure 1:1 mappings should be possible.