Yes, you publicly announce everything now so you can throw it all at the feet of the ousted leader. If not, enough time will pass where blaming the ousted leader looks like excuses for the current one and just looks bad to the public. Look at the current US administration as an example of how the constant blaming of the previous administration played to the public opinion.
Who decided to act? Some dirt that everyone thought was swept under the rug leaked, and now everyone can see how much of a dirt bag Jensen is. It's looking to me like the house that Jensen built is just a bit less raggedy than a house of cards built on sand on top of an active fault line. The news of these deals isn't a recent revelation. The recent news is that there's possible skirting of laws by the company led by a philanderer at best with one of his trysts being with a foreign spy. There is no good light to paint this.
Im not threaten by China at all, there should be no sale restrictions. However I also don't think CEOs should be able to sidestep government regulations that they operate under and I hope he gets nailed to the wall over this.
If I got caught selling even a handful of restricted GPUs to China, I would be in prison. If we want to even pretend we live under the Rule of Law, this guy should be too.
> However I also don't think CEOs should be able to sidestep government regulations
Why not?
Is Nvidia an American company or a global company?
Jensen is right, logical and pragmatic
> I hope he gets nailed to the wall over this
Hope whatever you want to hope, go look at your local towns and cities and tell me how they’re doing. Go see what our retarded mindset of self-harm did to us.
>Rule of Law
What a nice pipedream. America can’t be a place of dreams and of wanting harm to others at the same time, you’ve gotta pick a lane buddy. The jingoism is coming from a tiny tiny handful of people, most Americans don’t give a fuuuuuck and just wanna have fun. There’s no reason for us to restrict or fight China it’s the dumbest shit, they’re so innovative
What does that even mean? What does being a "global company" mean exactly? It was founded in the US, it is headquartered in California, its stock is sold public on the US stock exchange. Yeah it needs to follow US rules.
And self harm for following our own rules? If the law is wrong, the law should be changed, but that doesn't mean you can just ignore the law when it is convenient because other people break laws. People do drugs and steal stuff every day, does that mean I should be allowed to smoke crack on the White House lawn and steal their pink flamingos without punishment?
Also if you don't believe in the Rule of Law or that we should enforce it, you don't believe in democracy or modern society. In which case I really could not care less about your opinions on law and order because they are of zero worth. It would just be rule by strength of arms, and the only reasonable response to that is using my own strength of arms to beat or kill my opposition into submission.
> It was founded in the US, it is headquartered in California, its stock is sold public on the US stock exchange. Yeah it needs to follow US rules.
Fuck that
The law gets changed thanks to innovators and pioneers like him otherwise we follow the same policy that’s killing us.
I simply refuse no matter what to see 1.4 billion people as the enemy blindly when they’re driving our world towards progress while our governance is out here jerking off and hurting ourselves
The simple truth is the US benefits from them selling us physical things in exchange for our IOUs and “intellectual property”. Geopolitics should always be pragmatic instead of values driven, and I’ll be damned if my country is giving away its advantage instead of using that advantage to gain an even bigger advantage.
That being said, it would’ve been better for China to be dependent on Nvidia instead of funneling that money into domestic alternatives.
Do you think I'm the FBI? Why are you asking me this like I'm the one making the claims? All I did was report what is being said about the situation. Also, nobody asked if you were concerned. Why is your opinion important or interesting in any way regarding this. Are you Jensen using an alias?
was there a general region where this happened more frequently that doesn't look like a heat map of the general population? I'm thinking specifically about east coast crime family tropes here
Who's being dense? Flock is just logging data it sees in the wild. That has nothing to do with the 4th amendment. It is the cops using that data that would be any where near violating the 4th. So as stated, Flock isn't doing anything illegal. If you want it to be illegal nationally, Congress needs to get involved.
Constructive intent. These systems exists for purposes other than violating our rights in the same way that a known drug dealer has a pill press for decoration.
I don't agree that nobody realizes it. I think it's more of an SEP[0] situation. It's not like people are unaware that cameras are prevalent and there's a good chance you are being recorded anytime you are in public. It's more like it is such an issue that is well beyond the control of the individual it is best to just act like it's not really there allowing them to carry on as normal.
The other thing is a lot of people don't realize that the nature of the surveillance has changed. I'm not that concerned with random security cameras recording me most of the time because they're dumb and only record so I'm only really giving up information that anyone else there in the moment can already see. With flock and other newer systems though the data is collated and collected making it a complete dragnet for anyone in the area they operate in.
It's one of the places I hope the courts or legislature updates the 4th amendment to acknowledge that computer systems allow collection of individually innocuous data points to build into an effective panopticon. A lot of the limits on the 4th don't really include a realization that technology has made a lot of things so much easier to do that the government is able to do much more with the same information because they can cross compare it with so many other datapoints that they can cheaply do it for everyone instead of being restricted by the resources and having to choose who to investigate.
Not that long ago I remember signs that would say "You're on camera". I always thought that it was illegal (in the US) to be filmed without consent, but I guess I was wrong..
reply