News Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang and President Trump reportedly discussed AI policy, DeepSeek, and hardware export controls in a meeting

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
I'm going to speculate in an unusual and perhaps not directly related way. But, am I imagining that OpenAI has deliberately made their models very computationally heavy, so as to force customers to buy more computing cards to train them fast enough to be competitive? This seems like a strange reasoning on my part, but it is also very capitalist, because it is about maximizing profit for the manufacturer of the computing hardware.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219
I suspect China gets the GPUs regardless, through resellers in neighboring countries that won't respect the sanctions. But it will be harder with the sanctions in place...

So will Trump keep the sanctions to hinder an opposing country and risk hurting a powerful American country bottom-line, or, will he appear to assist an opposing country for the benefit of an American company? It's a tricky, no-win position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219
USAFRet said:
As usual, a general warning to all and sundry:
Anything political will be summarily removed.
Click to expand...
The OP article is political...

Jensen Huang meets with President Trump and talks about the politics of AI.

Example:
Jensen Huang, CEO and co-founder of Nvidia, met with U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House to discuss American AI policy
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: TechSpectrum, P.Amini, ivan_vy and 1 other person
Nvidia just took a bit hit from Deep seek release. Needs to lobby for something to hold that back so his stock can continue to reap those sweet sweet MASSIVE profits they been enjoying last couple years.

Complete and total uninformed speculation and guessing on my part. But hey why not. Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: bit_user and artk2219
Math Geek said:
Nvidia just took a bit hit from Deep seek release. Needs to lobby for something to hold that back so his stock can continue to reap those sweet sweet MASSIVE profits they been enjoying last couple years.

Complete and total uninformed speculation and guessing on my part. But hey why not. Lol
Click to expand...
It’s true that competition is heating up in the Ai world, but Nvidia still has a massive lead in AI hardware, software, and ecosystem support, and we all know that is not going to change.

DeepSeek’s release might shake things up, but it’s unlikely to cause any issues overnight. That said, Nvidia has always been aggressive in protecting its market position, whether through innovation, strategic partnerships, or yes, lobbying as well. Some will claim conspiracy theories, but at the end of the day, that's all they are, just theories.

It’ll be interesting to see how things progress over the coming months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: artk2219
the OpenAI and NVidia business models area at risk, might trigger a huge cascade of stocks falling, for one or another angle it will inevitable hit economics and by correlation to politics.
Mod is right, some comments were awfully political biased.
 
ivan_vy said:
the OpenAI and NVidia business models area at risk, might trigger a huge cascade of stocks falling
Click to expand...
I'll be weird again, but I think this is a standard, expected, and probably even desired and pursued event of technology bubbles and... all sorts of other crises. You can profit from development in any direction of stocks when you're prepared.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivan_vy
George³ said:
I'm going to speculate in an unusual and perhaps not directly related way. But, am I imagining that OpenAI has deliberately made their models very computationally heavy, so as to force customers to buy more computing cards to train them fast enough to be competitive?
Click to expand...
Your first error is in assuming OpenAI even releases its models, which they don't. Second, because they don't release them, OpenAI is the one having to buy expensive GPUs which is among the reasons they're hemorrhaging ungodly amounts of money, right now.

It's also why they're working on building their own chips for inferencing (and eventually training, too).

George³ said:
This seems like a strange reasoning on my part, but it is also very capitalist, because it is about maximizing profit for the manufacturer of the computing hardware.
Click to expand...
Whatever your reasoning, it's a good idea to try and see if it aligns with the facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P.Amini
bit_user said:
Your first error is in assuming OpenAI even releases its models, which they don't. Second, because they don't release them, OpenAI is the one having to buy expensive GPUs which is among the reasons they're hemorrhaging ungodly amounts of money, right now.
​
​

It's also why they're working on building their own chips for inferencing (and eventually training, too).
​
​


Whatever your reasoning, it's a good idea to try and see if it aligns with the facts.
Click to expand...
I agree with the individual points of your comment. I would just ask you to broaden your view of things a little to see how the whole picture changes all this. I can be verbose, but I will limit myself as much as possible. Open AI and Nvidia sell their products to companies that compete in the AI market. Sam Altman, separately, hoped to attract at least a few more trillion dollars for AI, some of which would be for him as well. Think in perspective and with all the facts. Selective interpretation does not help. And yes, I also read the analysis of semianalysis.com. Nonsense from previously collected "leaked" information in the public domain(you must know for the Window of Overton)(I deliberately do not call them facts) that were stuck together and given the appearance of a scientific study. With tables, graphs, etc.
 
Math Geek said:
Nvidia just took a bit hit from Deep seek release. Needs to lobby for something to hold that back so his stock can continue to reap those sweet sweet MASSIVE profits they been enjoying last couple years.

Complete and total uninformed speculation and guessing on my part. But hey why not. Lol
Click to expand...
I totally agree, though. The latest round of restrictions from the outgoing administration are threatening to seriously hit their revenues. Nvidia has been on a massive surge and that seemed hard to sustain, even without such headwinds (not to mention the unsupported DeepSeek claims).

Speaking of DeepSeek's claims, SemiAnalysis believes they're exaggerated by a factor of 400:

wccftech.com

AI Markets Were Deceived To Believe In DeepSeek's Low Training Costs; They Are Actually 400 Times Higher Than The Reported Figure

The controversy around DeepSeek's costs for training their R1 model shook up the markets, but it seems like there was a lot of deception.
wccftech.com wccftech.com

I'd love it, if someone could tell whether the hedge fund backing DeepSeek shorted a bunch of Nvidia stock, right before their announcement of how much it cost to train.
 
George³ said:
I'll be weird again, but I think this is a standard, expected, and probably even desired and pursued event of technology bubbles and... all sorts of other crises. You can profit from development in any direction of stocks when you're prepared.
Click to expand...
Business cycles are a fact of life, whether anyone wants them or not. Given that, there are some investors who try to predict and profit from that. However, that's a risky game and you can lose a lot of money with a bad prediction.

Nvidia, themselves, has no incentive for the bubble to pop. As above, it would be a good idea to try and ground your "weird" ideas with a logical argument backed by a solid and well-sourced fact pattern. Furthermore, I'd repeat the common wisdom that extraordinary claims deserve extraordinary evidence.

George³ said:
Open AI and Nvidia sell their products to companies that compete in the AI market. Sam Altman, separately, hoped to attract at least a few more trillion dollars for AI, some of which would be for him as well.
Click to expand...
Altman has no incentive for OpenAI's models either to be expensive to train or inference. Both of those are costing OpenAI lots of money, to the point where it's unprofitable. If his goal is to drive value for OpenAI (and thereby himself), then it's in his interest for it to be as profitable as possible.

George³ said:
Think in perspective and with all the facts. Selective interpretation does not help.
Click to expand...
I like facts. Which ones, in particular, do you think support your case? Please cite sources.

George³ said:
And yes, I also read the analysis of semianalysis.com. Nonsense from previously collected "leaked" information in the public domain
Click to expand...
I'll admit that I haven't yet read through their entire piece on this subject, but their analysis seems cogent and well-founded, to me:

semianalysis.com

DeepSeek Debates: Chinese Leadership On Cost, True Training Cost, Closed Model Margin Impacts

The DeepSeek Narrative Takes the World by Storm DeepSeek took the world by storm. For the last week, DeepSeek has been the only topic that anyone in the world wants to talk about. As it currently s…
semianalysis.com semianalysis.com
 
bit_user said:
Altman has no incentive for OpenAI's models either to be expensive to train or inference
Click to expand...
I don't know who said this. You've been trying to interpret what I wrote as it benefits you, or the campaign against DeepSeek, several times now, and it's always wrong. You made my day with a lot of fun. Especially with a sentence in which you try to imply that Sam Altman is not greedy, or that he necessarily wants to profit from a price accessible to everyone, through the turnover of many options sold, and not through other methods. Do you want links to articles in which his desire to make the private and public sectors (in the face of the military and security services) spend several trillion on AI was written, or you will find them yourself. Because I'm sleepy already., and I don't feel like discussing it with an insensitive colleague is useful.
 
George³ said:
You've been trying to interpret what I wrote as it benefits you, or the campaign against DeepSeek, several times now,
Click to expand...
I'm not in anyone's pocket. Please try to make your case with sound logic and well-sourced facts, not smearing me or SemiAnalysis with unfounded allegations of conflict-of-interest.

George³ said:
you try to imply that Sam Altman is not greedy,
Click to expand...
I never said that. My point was actually that our presumption of his greed should make us confident that he wants to lower OpenAI's hardware costs, because it would make OpenAI more profitable (and therefore increase its value to investors). It's supported by the fact that OpenAI is working on its own chips, precisely in order to help save on hardware costs.
 
Last edited:
Gaidax said:
Who knows what they have discussed. The press release is just a no real details PR speak.
Click to expand...
I think we know generally what they discussed. Jensen's agenda is pretty obvious.

The thing to watch is what Trump says and does regarding subjects like:
  • tariffs on chips and other hardware from Taiwan (as well as other Asian countries with high-tech manufacturing)
  • restrictions on exports of AI hardware
  • policies that affect AI and tech in general (e.g. tax breaks, H1B visas, etc.).
 
  • Like
Reactions: stonecarver
bit_user said:
That's exactly what I linked in my post before that. So, there shouldn't have been any confusion, but thanks for pointing out my typo. Fixed.
Click to expand...
Yes, I read all of this and I explained how I perceive it in a previous comment. I won't repeat myself. This is a manipulation technique. The Wikipedia article says it's political, but it's used by everyone who has a lot of money, and through their money, a lot of (any) power, fame, and influence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom