you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 286 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (32 children)

While Jensen can’t be faulted for making these moves because he was keeping the best interests of the company in mind, it’s a stab in the back for gamers and hardware owners who are unable to locate any mouth-watering deals for GPUs or memory because of the perceived shortage.

I really dislike this final paragraph. In one sentence, it both attempts to absolve Jensen of all fault in the current shortage, and frames gamers and hardware enthusiasts as entitled babies crying about the lack of amazing sales. Rather than the reality of high-end GPUs requiring you to take out a loan at this point, if you can even find one. I don't need a "mouth-watering deal", I'll settle for affordable, thanks.

  • source
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] 103 points 15 hours ago (4 children)

    Crazy final paragraph. The whole article is about Nvidia has artificially created scarcity for its products by funding AI start ups to buy it's products.

    It is effectively buying back its own products. This alongside the circular payment systems between AI companies and Nvidia is destined to end very very badly. It can only work while the market grows and share prices go up. It is destined to be one catastrophic collapse when things go the other way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 hours ago (1 child)

    Interesting best interests. I guess Nvidia investors could all have a deep seeded masochistic and self-destruction fetish, but it sounds unlikely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 6 hours ago*

    I have a deep seeded desire to have a 401k but little direct control over how much Nvidia they bought for me. Many 401k packages do not allow particularly granular investments even if I would prefer to shield myself from this obvious financial ant mill.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 27 points 11 hours ago

    It has a point in that Jensen was not alone in these decisions and the real blame should be placed on Nvidia as a whole. The headline pins the blame solely on Jensen, using him as a scapegoat while the actual company dodges blame and continues its anti-consumer practices.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

    TIL no matter what you do it's always justified as long as you've had your company's interest on your mind

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 14 hours ago (1 child)

    no matter what you do it's always justified as long as you've had your company's interest on your mind

    That is exactly what the tobacco and oil companies have been arguing for decades.

    Killing your customers or the planet are much less important things than constantly increasing corporate revenue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 4 hours ago

    Jup but it‘s easier to imagine what comes after the apocalypse than it is to imagine what comes after capitalism for those people. They don‘t see that the system is rigged or that CEOs of big corporations do their jobs knowing that because they are shit bags.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

    While Jensen can’t be faulted for making these moves because he was keeping the best interests of the company in mind,

    "making these moves" = market manipulation

    He sure as fuck can be faulted for that, it is literally a crime. What is this journalist smoking?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 16 hours ago (7 children)

    Few groups have been bigger apologists for their corporate abusers than capital-G Gamers. They would have followed Nvidia into hell itself so long as Huang blew even the thinnest wisps of smoke up their unwashed asses. Discovering that their hardware suppliers have only ever used them for their money has seriously hurt their egos and broken their brains.

    It's like Gamers thought they were dating the most popular kid in school, only to discover that they were only hanging out with Gamers because Gamers' mom had an old Mustang that she like them drive. Now they're dating someone rich college student who owns a Porche, and they're not returning Gamers' calls, and they're going through all of the phase of teenage grief.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -17 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

    NAILED. IT. I'd love all the people who feel they have a right to video cards explain that to a Palestinian orphan.

    🎯 1
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 hours ago

    This isn't a suffering competition, you're being ridiculous. You can say that about literally anything anybody complains about. No, while the things happening in Palestine are fucking horrific, "but worse things happen" doesn't invalidate other peoples' problems.

    Frankly you sound like an ass even comparing the two.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

    Why should anyone explain that to a dead kid?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

    An orphan, is by definition, alive. No one talks about "dead orphans". Bruce Wayne isn't a "live orphan".

    Anyway, my comment was about the privilege Western gamers have in 2026.

    "NOAAWW! You can't take away my high-end video cards! I have the RIGHT to play video games at a reasonable price!"

    Imagine explaining your vast suffering under these filthy capitalists from your watertight, HVAC controlled domicile. Said suffering is way overblown on lemmy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 10 hours ago

    I hope you think of people with no legs when you stub your toe in the dark.

    (Invalidating anyone's suffering on the basis that someone else out there has it worse would mean that nobody else is justified to suffer than the absolutely most miserable. Suffering is an inescapable facet of the human condition, but it doesn't mean we shoudn't try reducing it.)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 hours ago*

    If the parents die it's an orphan. If the orphan then dies it is a dead orphan.

    Chiming in with "there is greater misery in the world" is so tonedeaf. Yes, we all know. What does this has to do with the Problem that is discussed?

    Go to therapy if all that is laying so heavy on you that you have to make every discussion about what's on your mind.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 hours ago

    While Jensen can't be faulted for making these moves because he was keeping the best interests of the company in mind, it does kind of suck that he's actively destroying the planet and ruining people's lives.

    Since when is doing business an excuse for everything? Oh, right, it's America...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 4 hours ago

    It’s not even true. Because it was definitely NOT in the company‘s best interest to smuggle hardware to China. He just enabled future competitors with that move and broke the law. He also did not have to cozy up to the orange turd to keep Nvidia afloat.

    What I‘m trying to say is: He definitely did not always had Nvidia‘s interests in mind so why try to make that argument there? It‘s just dishonest.

    Besides „the law says the company must make money“ does not absolve anyone for acting morally wrong. That way of thinking is why so many things are messed up right now.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -9 points 16 hours ago (5 children)

    I mean bootlicking aside, they're not wrong. Jensen's a corpo and they will always chase profits. Sometimes stooping to borderline illegal maneuvers like this price fixing thing or the ram cartel. In an ideal world these fuckers would get prosecuted and do jail time, but as it stands we are somewhat at their whims. That's why I don't get this entitlement with affordable gpu's - they're high tech components and for a while they were more affordable but gamers are no longer the most profitable market so yhings change. There was no "betrayal" and no "abandonment" because no one owes gamers anything, just like they don't owe the companies anything. Shit's bkt affordable? Short of a class action lawsuit, tough luck, adapt and move on, because it looks like we're heading back to the gpu wild west of the late 90s.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

    You're getting blasted for this because people don't want to hear it, not because anything you said was wrong.

    The only part I disagree with is the 90s style wild west theme; that would require competition of which none will be able to grow. It's impossible to catch up to where high end GPU market is right now without an insane investment that could never be recouped. Why would ANYONE bother spending billions trying to white-room a new competing GPU architecture from the ground up just to slip into fourth place behind Intel's 1% market share? Especially since, as you pointed out, the established players don't have to follow any laws especially when it comes to buying up and dissolving any and all competition in their field.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 hours ago (1 child)

    No, they are getting blasted for agreeing with the batshit take of the journalist claiming that Jensen cannot be faulted for committing crimes in the interests of his company.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 hours ago

    That's not how I read it at all, it looks to me as if he's ACKNOWLEDGING the actual fact that nvidia was able to commit those crimes with absolute impunity, has not been held individually or collectively responsible, and probably won't in any time-frame that's going to realistically change the course of these events.

    He cannot be faulted by people who won't fault him. Laws that are not enforced are more like suggestions.

  • source
  • parent