Welcome to the week from Prof G Media, where we break down what mattered and what it all means. I'm George Hahn and it's Friday, November 13th.
Today, Jensen Huang's dramatic exit from Nvidia. Then revisiting what DOGE did to the federal government and what the midterms mean for the GOP in 2028. And finally, why Gen Z has it so bad and what they can do about it. Let's get into it.
Jensen Huang built Nvidia into one of the most valuable companies in the world. This week, it all came apart. On Sunday, Huang admitted to an affair with Alice Huang, no relation, a senior executive at one of Nvidia's biggest customers in Southeast Asia. US officials believe she was working for Chinese intelligence. On Wednesday, the New York Times reported a second affair, this time with an Nvidia executive who reports directly to Huang. By Thursday, he had resigned as CEO. On Tuesday's Prof G Markets, Ashley Gold, Semaphore's senior tech correspondent, asked what the first affair may reveal about his long push to sell chips in China.
What it tells us is that, you know, we obviously don't know if he knew that he was having an affair with the spy. He could have been taken by surprise like everyone has. What we do know is that his on-the-record statements, made many times, not just in that podcast interview you played, he has been pro-doing business with China, pro-selling chips to China. He's sort of stood alone in that among other tech executives in Washington, AI companies in Washington who have wanted to strengthen and limit export control so that American chips can't flow to China the way that they do, the way that Jensen has been able to convince this administration to allow sales of the H200 chips. So when you look back at everything he's said about that in the past year or so, it's like why, you know, do you genuinely believe that it is better for American competition that the Chinese have access to some of your chips because then they're reliant on your chips and they're not developing their own? Is that your true held belief about the way American versus China competition works or is something else at play? And I think if he had a relationship with this woman who turned out to be a spy, I don't know how you look at his statements and say, 'Well, he's just not a China hawk and that's what he believes about the way, you know, global business works.' So the fact that you sort of can't separate that anymore is the problem.
On Monday's Raging Moderates, Scott said the security failures run deeper than Nvidia.
What we have are defense-level, CIA-level, weapons-grade missile production, north of German-sensitive, you know, nuclear submarine construction-like sensitivity, and we have WeWork-like security. The reality is companies like Nvidia and OpenAI are the new defense contractors. This is the most sensitive material in the world and the fact that they don't have a minimum level of security protocols to ensure something like this doesn't happen. The other thing that's really upsetting here, and I actually think the bigger story that hasn't been covered, is that the Defense Department or our security apparatus had suspicions and maybe even knew that Ms. Huang was connected to the CCP and was potentially a spy, and they didn't give Jensen a heads up because it's clear this administration doesn't want anything to get in the way of Nvidia's stock, even if it means compromising our national security. This really reflects poorly on our security apparatus, what the priorities are of the security apparatus or President Trump. He'd rather take these types of risks than potentially risk the S&P, which is the sole bright spot. And also, you know, Jensen, this will be a lot of hand-wringing. The reality is the guy is worth $180 billion. He's 62. Most of us have been fired. This isn't a crime against humanity. He could retire. He could not only retire to Newport Beach, he could buy Newport Beach. And also, the stock today is down, but it's not going to be down that much because you can't build a $5 trillion company without building an outstanding bench. And just practically, and I've said this, I've been on the board of two companies that had nothing like Nvidia, but had sensitive technology. And just as we have to have open and honest conversations with our boys, board members need to have open and honest conversations with directors. Because what happens is you get older as a man and you get more powerful. You start believing that you're sexier than you are. You start mistaking kindness and people wanting power for sexual interest. And as men get more power and they have this incredibly irrational actor known as their dick, they need guardrails and they need very direct conversations. And there are conversations I've had with these two tech CEOs who are in their 30s and 40s, I've actually said to them word for word, if a woman is interested in you sexually or gives you those cues, you should assume she's a spy. And what people don't realize, and this sounds paranoid, but it's not, corporate espionage is everywhere. It's everywhere because the fastest way to grow your economy, any economy growing over four or six percent a year, is engaging in IP theft. We did it to European manufacturing technology. The Chinese have been doing it to us for 40 years. So for a CEO selling the most sensitive technology to not recognize there was a possibility here, and for our own security apparatus not to give him a heads up, this is the mother of all midlife crises. No guardrails, poor communication. And what this really indicates is that the government needs to do a much better job of installing the same types of security protocols.
On the same Tuesday episode of Prof G Markets, Robert Armstrong, the Financial Times US financial commentator, said, 'The question now is whether Nvidia has a plan for life after Huang.'
It's just agonizing to think about it. And on the corporate side, it's like, does Nvidia have a successor? What was their hit-by-a-bus plan with this guy?
And if you've got as important a guy as Mr. Huang walking around the world, you better have a hit-by-the-bus plan.
And if the answer is we were going to wing it,
That's a terrible indictment of the governance structure of that company.
