Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
I know we're all very sensitive these days. But he was running a multi trillion dollar company.
And the board of that company decided that the risks he presented to the company outweighed the benefits.
I'm quite interested to know what you mean here, between the lines. OK, he was running a multi-trillion dollar company, are you saying currently it's a over-reaction because of that, and the reaction would have been justified if it was smaller/bigger company? I'm really not sure what the underlying point you're trying to make here.
The guy changed the world, heaven forbid he sleeps with a few extra women. They were age appropriate for him. The guy's getting more punishment than the Epstein class did.
It is not about the sex! It is about the corruption/lying to the board/misuse of company resources/risk of abuse of power/impact on other people's career progression.
loading story #50474698
He's facing one of the largest divorces in history, you don't think that would be a little distracting?

And if you don't know why leaders can't have relationships with their employees, that ignorance is on you. You're trying to insult other people but it just makes you look bad.

Can't legally, or are you just talking about social pressure/policing? Because everyone involved are adults, and knew what they were doing.

Besides that, it comes down to how well he's able to separate personal life and work, and whether he continues to add value for shareholders (which Nvidia has clearly been an absolute outlier at doing, during his tenure).

But it looks like they won't give him a chance anyway.

I guess I mean corporate rules with actual teeth.
A lot of marriages survive even after stuff like this. Especially in Asian cultures. The fact that his wife is White is the only thing that hurts him on his chances here.

She'd be stupid as hell to divorce him.

Or she'd be more than adequately rich, worth around $75bn, able to do whatever the hell she wants with the rest of her life, able to have impacts independent of him, and free of a sleazy worm who humiliatingly cheated on her twice.
“Twice” is public information. The things that happened twice have high probability to occur more often.
Indeed! There’s a whole “another shoe to drop” vibe around this.

Edit: and there it is. Two employees, not just one.

A multi-trillion dollar company... so the standards are lower?
I think the implication, rather, is that the bar for dismissal should be higher.
loading story #50468666
That does seem to be the way of the world lately. Sure this person is awful but look at the shareholder value they have created!