Max Castroparedes

Jensen Huang should resign. As I told @BusinessInsider's @saraheneedleman, I don't see how he can stay on as CEO of Nvidia. I understand to most shareholders this will seem unimaginable. The man personally built the American semiconductor industry. He created Nvidia, conceived of the GPU, and scaled it into the backbone of the modern intelligence economy. He has personally run the company for 30+ years, commanding an incredible number of direct reports and directly overseeing every aspect of the company's operations. But this is a truly extraordinary case—an immense misjudgment that opened the company up to unimaginable reputational and legal liability, which will continue to haunt it in the eyes of Republicans and Democrats alike. And so, for the first time in its history, the board really does need to distinguish between the interests of Jensen Huang the man, and the $4 trillion company he's created. It's not just that the CEO of the world's largest company engaged in an extramarital affair. He did so with a customer—posing a massive conflict of interest. It's also clear this was more than a "potential" conflict of interest. The New York Times is reporting that, in addition to shipping Megaspeed huge quantities of its AI chips, Nvidia—under Mr. Huang's supervision—actually did attempt to intervene in the U.S. government's criminal investigation of that customer, Mr. Huang's girlfriend. This was a massive betrayal of President Trump's trust. And it wasn't just any customer. It was a woman allegedly operating as a spy for China's intelligence service—running a company that served as a middle-man for one of China's largest AI labs (Alibaba). And both the Commerce Department and the Department of Justice seem to believe this may have been happening in violation of U.S. law. We don't know what information might have been shared in the course of Mr. Huang's personal relationship—be it about Nvidia, its products, its customers, or senior officials across the Trump administration. If I were a major Nvidia partner today, I would be asking questions about what kind of information about my company might have been inadvertently shared with Ms. Huang. We can't trust Nvidia to conduct or abide a truly independent investigation. Under Mr. Huang's supervision, representatives from the company have made statements about this case that we now know to be false. It really doesn't matter what you think of the merits of American export control policy, or whether you agree with Jensen about open-source. This was a betrayal of Nvidia's shareholders, its customers, American security interests, and potentially U.S. law. The company deserves better. The semiconductor industry deserves better. And so I believe, for the first time in its history, Nvidia needs to seriously consider new leadership and a post-Jensen governance plan. businessinsider.com/jensen-h…

Regarding Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang's affair with an apparent Chinese intelligence asset, here's how I see the situation. First, there are a few glaring national security issues with this case: 1. Whether Chinese intelligence has obtained any sensitive, non-public information about Nvidia, its products, or—most overlooked—its customers. 2. Whether Chinese intelligence may have indirectly obtained any sensitive information about President Trump, senior U.S. officials, or White House staff via their interactions with Mr. Huang. 3. Whether Mr. Huang's confidential personal relationship with his customer might have unduly influenced the company's policy positions vis-a-vis China, or its decision to sell large numbers of its chips to Megaspeed—a company that has been under investigation by the Commerce Department for violations of American law. Second, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers in Congress will probably have a few distinct baskets of concern as they inevitably ask Mr. Huang to testify. The way I see it, there are: 1. Objections to the company's default policy position—that it should be permitted to sell large numbers of AI chips to customers in China in ways that undermine American security interests. 2. Objections to the company's aggressive lobbying campaign and hard-ball influence in DC, which has reportedly placed undue pressure on independent researchers and think tank staff. 3. Objections, primarily from Democrats, who have accused the company of corruption in its relationship with certain individuals in the President's orbit. 4. Objections to this latest extramarital affair—between the CEO of the largest company in the world, and one of his customers. This would be a governance nightmare for any publicly traded company, even if she weren't a spy.