Live data from Hacker News

“CEO said a thing” journalism

karlbode.com

21–30 of 81 posts

Re: “CEO said a thing” journalism

#21
I've come to the conclusion recently that if a tech CEO is pushing for something , it's probably something normal people should be fighting against. To the point where "Elon/Mark/Jensen/Peter wants society to do [thing]" is a pretty strong signal that [thing] is actually a terrible idea.

Re: “CEO said a thing” journalism

#22

It is at least entertaining when certain CEOs speak off-the-cuff and reveal they have no clue what they are talking about. Jensen thinks DLSS 5 works at "the geometry level", for instance. Oh and he pays engineers $500,000 to spend $250,000 on Claude tokens.

Jensen Huang knows that this is a gold rush and that his job is to sell shovels.

He's not stupid.

Re: “CEO said a thing” journalism

#23

It is at least entertaining when certain CEOs speak off-the-cuff and reveal they have no clue what they are talking about. Jensen thinks DLSS 5 works at "the geometry level", for instance. Oh and he pays engineers $500,000 to spend $250,000 on Claude tokens.

So, is your position that Jensen Huang, CEO of NVDA, is an idiot?

Re: “CEO said a thing” journalism

#24

I'm confident this phenomenon exists in other industries too. Is there a term that's equivalent to "reactionary" but applies to leftist/liberal ideals or is it fine for me to start referring to this kind of writing as "reactionary" save that I apply some sort of qualifier like "leftist" or "liberal" before or afterwards?

Controversially, that would be ‘woke’, but obvs the term is now somewhat tarnished.

As the right has an immovable Evangelical wing, so now does the Left. A good word for such people is currently unoccupied.

Re: “CEO said a thing” journalism

#25

It is at least entertaining when certain CEOs speak off-the-cuff and reveal they have no clue what they are talking about. Jensen thinks DLSS 5 works at "the geometry level", for instance. Oh and he pays engineers $500,000 to spend $250,000 on Claude tokens.

I don't know the quote you're referring to, but if there were a CEO who I think understands the technical details of his products much better than most, it would be Jensen Huang.

And there is a huge difference between a CEO having "no clue" and a CEO trying to speak in terms that laymen and the business press can understand (even if a ton gets lost in translation).

Re: “CEO said a thing” journalism

#27
The thing this article does not cover is that the average journalist has no sway. Most readers don't want the opinion of some random person covering a space, so "CEO Said a Thing" is the headline that draws the reader in. Many times the journalist also is not getting paid enough to inject any sort of counterpoint or unique perspective. This just seems like the natural outcome of the click-whoring online "news" structure we've created.

Re: “CEO said a thing” journalism

#28

It is at least entertaining when certain CEOs speak off-the-cuff and reveal they have no clue what they are talking about. Jensen thinks DLSS 5 works at "the geometry level", for instance. Oh and he pays engineers $500,000 to spend $250,000 on Claude tokens.

> Oh and he pays engineers $500,000 to spend $250,000 on Claude tokens.

If a CEO wants to pay engineers $500,000 and then let them spend as much as they need on tools and services, I'm all for it.

Getting angry at a CEO for paying high compensation and also having a high tool use budget is not a take I expected on Hacker News.

Re: “CEO said a thing” journalism

#29
post #9

It is at least entertaining when certain CEOs speak off-the-cuff and reveal they have no clue what they are talking about. Jensen thinks DLSS 5 works at "the geometry level", for instance. Oh and he pays engineers $500,000 to spend $250,000 on Claude tokens.

It doesn't reveal that they have no clue of what they're talking about. They know that a good number of idiot CEOs will hear this and dictate their engineers spend more claude/codex money, which benefits them. Jensen isn't an idiot, he's capitalizing on the market.

It doesn't reveal they don't have no clue either - the problem is that both "Doesn't actually understand" and "Does understand but saying it because they think it'll benefit their products" look exactly the same from the outside.

All we know is he's saying things that are technically incorrect. And I'm not sure where that falls on the line of "Just Acceptable Marketing BS" to "Lying to the market about a Publicly Traded company" that would fall if he does understand it.

And while true he very much had deep technical education and roles, he's been C-level for over 30 years now. And a lot can change - both in the underlying technology and an individual's technical understanding - in 30 years.

Post reply on HN