US sanction law seems to be really scary. Everyone is scared of it.

I used to work at a company where the sanction was around something mundane like Excel or something, and we had to make it an urgent priority to ban all users from Russia to access ... spinning the wheel ... our spreadsheet functionality.

My co-workers and I found it funny that US decided to ban Russia from using an online Excel-like functionality.

> Wtf why is everyone assuming Nvidia skirted an export ban

Because the woman he has an affair with happens to run a shell company that funnels chips to China and skirts the export ban. What a coincidence, huh?

I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that.

Affairs don't take down CEOs of major public companies. It's kind of assumed that they all do it. Like, how many subordinates of Elon supposedly had one of his kids?

Everyone involved has to be CYAing. It's pretty likely that a whole boatload of people were involved and none of them want to be the scapegoat that gets to go to jail for it. If they can sell this as something as simple as Jensen getting tricked by a cute spy, then everyone involved can sleep easy and Jensen will probably keep controlling things behind the scenes for a while.

Affairs with direct reports will absolutely take down a CEO. Add the spy to this and the fact that it's multiple women and it's easy to see why this happened - and it should. Public company CEOs don't get to do whatever the hell they want, including break all company policies and ethics because the stock price is up. Especially not when it has all been made public.

My guess is that someone knew this and leaked it because they also have insider information that Nvidia is about to be forced to write down the AI trade anyways and they 1) don't want Jensen walking away with a golden parachute and/or 2) want to use the spectacle of Jensen's infidelity to color the narrative or distract from something.

Yeah, this has to be related to the export ban. It's too much of a coincidence that the woman happens to run a shell company that funnels NVIDIA chips to China.

It's just unlikely that an affair would nuke his CEO's position.

I built some personal projects that involved devices like this.

I have every incentive to keep it local. Yet I connect it to a host on the internet. It turns out that it is convoluted and less reliable to have local servers and stuff....

fair, local is more work up front. if you used well established projects, i would beg to differ. I've been running on one these raspberry pis for 5 years with just minimal updates. the tasmotas get firmware update when needed but often rare. I think i had to remove one after 8 years but so far so good. i expect the other 20 to keep going for another 10 years at this point.

Probably not. If it is certified for emergency purposes, it would have say so because that would expand the market quite a lot e.g. military operation, emergency services.

iPhone's satellite connection isn't certified for anything either. It's a best-effort backup. This would be no different.

(All Apple has is the license for the radio bands they use to communicate with the satellites.)

You said others would drive you mad if they used a phone in the wild. What??!?!?!

You are also sad that .... spinning the wheel ... the optionality exists.

It's optional. You don't have to use that option. But nooo that's not acceptable. You want the option to not exist at all for you and everyone. Otherwise, you will continue being "deeply saddened" ??!?!?

Being bothered by the behavior of other people is not speaking for them.

Optionality is never truly optionality when it comes to technology. I would think that people on Hacker News would understand this, even if they disagree with my opinion on this specific issue.

If nothing else it means you can ditch the $20/mo Garmin Inreach plan, which got you PITA text messages at best. All the people going on about the virtues of disconnecting have never been so disconnected that they have to think about medical emergencies or rescue from weather / mechanical trouble / etc.

At the current state, maybe not much. He was integral to the journey, of course.

The bigger threat is Jensen selling all his stocks at peak (if he was fired). Then, this dude with $100B in the bank could've easily started an NVIIA competitor. He has every component needed for a success. This is why NVIDIA's board would never let this guy go.

> This gives him a lot of leverage. He isn't desperate to make a living.

He cofounded the company over 30 years ago. He isn't just a rich person with a desk job he doesn't care about.

Which makes it even more likely he’d start a competitor.

How would that even work?

You are asking how a person with $100B in assets would start a new company? :shrug:

If we had to pick the best person who could've started an NVIDIA competitor, it would be Jensen.

Read the original comment I replied to. You suggested that Huang has leverage in this situation. I suggested otherwise because I'm certain he will be both financially and emotionally keen to stay at the helm of the company he has helped build over the previous three decades. So no, I don't think he has leverage because the board knows that he's financially and emotionally keen.

Now you and the other commenter are suggesting that he could just go off and start a new competitor? For one, literally no one has done that, and the only competitors are already massive semiconductor companies. Secondly, his "assets", as you put them, are almost entirely tied up in NVIDIA. So you can fund a competitor using stock of the company you hope to beat? That makes no sense. Thirdly, I highly doubt a separation agreement, if it came to that, would allow him to start a competitor.

So again, I ask, how would that work?

> I'm certain he will be both financially and emotionally

Financially, no. Most of his stocks are already vested. Emotion is just a soft condition. It's not like he would go bankrupt without a job.

> For one, literally no one has done that

Tons of people were fired from their own startups and used the money to start, fund, or work for a competitor.

> Secondly, his "assets", as you put them, are almost entirely tied up in NVIDIA.

He could sell NVIDIA stocks... especially after he was fired.

> So you can fund a competitor using stock of the company you hope to beat?

It's so naive to think one company will beat another company.

Jensen would be the best candidate to start a chip company that could become a major player.

Semiconductor companies today are pretty happy because there are like 3-4 players. Having another player coming into the industry will be extremely expensive for the current players. Nobody would beat anybody. But the market share can be shared with more players.

> Thirdly, I highly doubt a separation agreement, if it came to that, would allow him to start a competitor.

They cannot force Jensen to sign that term. Sure, if Jensen accepts that term, it means he doesn't want to start a competitor. But we don't know what Jensen is thinking.

We are talking about the possibilities. Starting a competitor is one major possibility that the board has to consider if they think about firing Jensen.

> So again, I ask, how would that work?

Are you asking how to start a company e.g. setting up LLC in Delaware? or you are saying it's impossible for Jensen to start a new company after being fired from NVIDIA if he is fired?

I'm not a billionaire, so I don't know whether it is difficult for a billionaire to start a company. Maybe this is one thing that is easier for average people. I have no idea.

They are both rich, lmao. The wealth is marital.

But I agree with you that both of them or one of them will be very rich because they will get to sell at the top without upsetting the market.

OH NO WE HAVE TO SELL BECAUSE OF THE DIVORCE NOW. BEFORE THE DEMOCRATS NUKE AI COMPANIES. OH NO. [insert croc tears here]

You can google Luo Pai (from Enron) to learn more.