I happen to own some Nvidia stock, and shareholders have a right to assess the risk. And don’t come with some ad hoc statement! The shareholders deserve the full photographic detail; whether it’s spanking, golden showers, Peruvian loveballs, Chilean arm extenders, atm or plain old missionary. BTW I can volunteer to help analyze the material (dm me)
Quite the opposite of what Nvidia said in a statement just a week ago.
https://abcnews.com/US/nvidia-responds-report-ceo-allegedly-targeted-chinese-spy/story?id=137704250
In a statement to ABC News, a Nvidia spokesperson said Jensen Huang “talks with thousands of customer executives every year.”
“Jensen’s interactions with Ms. Huang are not unusual or unexpected,” the statement read. “Meetings with customers are part of a CEO’s job.”
Considering the impact to the stock price, I wonder if the SEC will get involved since Nvidia provided a false statement.
🤌
I have to ask… beyond the dramatic headline, what’s the big deal?
China is doing their own thing with LLM ASICs. They have been, for some time.
Basically all of Nvidia’s internal documentation could be leaked, and… nothing would really change, as they still have a gigantic software and silicon moat where they are applicable.
Security could be an issue for (say) running Nvidia hardware at the DoD, but they should be protected by more layers anyway?
There’s the implication that the CCP blackmailed this woman, but that’s not exactly unexpected. They have a long history of controlling overseas citizens, as do other countries. Obviously Jensen shouldn’t have done this, but his romantic life is his personal business.
So what, specifically, is everyone so worried about?
So what, specifically, is everyone so worried about?
She is CEO of Megaspeed , who bought $4.8B of nVidia chips and then sold $2B to the Chinese state illegally. There are crimes here, including:
Individuals and corporations caught illegally exporting restricted hardware (such as Nvidia H100 or Blackwell-series GPUs) are prosecuted under serious federal and international trade statutes:
Export Control Violations: Breaking the Export Control Reform Act (ECRA) and Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) regulations by shipping restricted high-performance computing tech without a license
Smuggling & Fraud: Charges related to smuggling goods from the United States, wire fraud, and using falsified end-user documentation or shell companies.
Those chips were not legal to sell to China. This would involve collusion between Nvidia and Megaspeed.
I see.
Yeah that is serious.
…TBH I expect Jensen to avoid prosecution or just get a pardon. Though the incentives behind that are complicated too, as many actors (like OpenAI and X) would very much like their future hardware competitor to be weakened.
It’s anti-china slop in preparation for the next round of hostilities from the war mongering US government. It’s also, ironically, pro-AI slop.
The belief is China cannot possibly develop anything on their own, they have to steal everything. And that AI is such an invaluable tool for “innovation” that it being in the hands of China would allow them to develop things that could hurt the US. Such as the most recession proof economy the world has ever seen, cheap standardized nuclear reactors that can be deployed in 5 years instead of 30, anti-drone technology, and drone technology that could take out US warships and could easily fly past the best US and Israeli defenses.
It would be crazy if China had literally all of that since no other country comes close to any of it, so the US must work to prevent that at any costs.
I mean… the sentiment may not be wrong, but how is this a conspiracy? Or “slop”? The affair appears to be real, and the sell-off was real too; it exists without anyone inventing this story.
Because it’s just not news, or important. If the CEO of Stellantis slept with a Canadian CEO to get better prices on steel, is that news worthy?
Indeed. I guess the question I’m asking is “what leverage was exercised,” as it appears Nvidia has always acted in their own interest.
Nvidia has always acted in their own interest.
Legally. But those chips were illegal to directly sell to China. Huang and Huang have put nvidia at huge risk, which has lost people billions in investments, which places nvidia at a legal liability from stockholders. There will be a class action, whether a corrupt DOJ does anything or not about the smuggling.
You can’t just fuck around with side hustles as CEO of a public company. Does Huang think he’s the President?
If the CEO of Stellantis slept with a Canadian CEO to get better prices on steel, is that news worthy?
Poor analogy. It would be newsworthy if Canada had a sanction to not sell the steel to Stellantis. You seem to be glossing over the criminal activity pretty thick on your agenda of an innocent affair.
‘Criminal’ activity usually involves a victim. There is no victim here. There’s a good chance the sanction was in fact not legal anyway, but even if it was… do we really need news every time someone commits a minor civil offense? Should I be publishing a newspaper every time someone in China uses the pirate bay?
‘Criminal’ activity usually involves a victim.
Criminal is defined as violating laws designated as crimes. Not if there’s a victim.
Crimes without victims are pretty much always looked on as unjust when that society falls; and generally speaking have no place in modern society.
