원문 보기
Nvidia is the indisputable rack Rocky Balboa champion of the AI revolution and that is not changing anytime soon on the chip front. Pleased to say that Jan I view it a little differently. Look, I mean at the end of the day like there's one Godfather Bay and that's Jensen. I think Jensen right now it it's the recognition that they're transparent.
In other words, like Nvidia is not trying to hide anything. They're ultimately saying like, hey, we are out there front and center and it just comes down to demand and supply is 12 to1 for their chips. I mean, I saw that being in Asia for the last 3 weeks. So, them congratulating Google, AMD and others that are going to be successful.
It continues to be Nvidia's world and everyone else is paying rent. But the reality is is that they are not going to sit there and hide behind some PR when it comes to, you know, whether it's Bur or anyone else calling it a bubble. I mean, Jensen's going to be out there front and center because, in my opinion, it continues to only be 10:30 p.m.
in that AI party that goes to 4. Jensen's remarks about Joe Rogan are really intriguing. On Monday, Sam Alman will perform Jimmy Fallon. This is the point at which we are beginning to explore a variety of topics. In order to remove the existential issue from the table, Sam Alman should concentrate on raising funds.
He must accomplish that. Perhaps he should visit Microsoft. Perhaps he should, I'm not sure, go out in public and prove that there is a there. However, Jimmy Fallon will not raise the necessary funds. It simply isn't. Jimmy Kimmel, that is. Let's quit being dumb. I mean, well, I didn't attend college to be foolish.
Foolish you. And I did speak with Jensen Hang earlier this week. And he added some remarks regarding energy moving vertically and the ultimate goal of AI. listen to it. That had significance. We cannot give them the market. As you are aware, Nvidia is now prohibited from entering China. In addition, China has prohibited Nvidia from entering the country.
As a result, I believe we are the only business in history to be outlawed on both sides. We stated that China's AI sector would suffer if the US were not in China. Yes, it hasn't happened at all. Their semiconductor sector has consequently increased in size. In contrast to doubling annually compounded, the semiconductor industry in the west and around the world is expanding at a rate of 20 to 30% annually.
Catching up doesn't take long. Naturally, a few weeks ago, he expressed his belief that China was genuinely winning some of this race. Indeed, this individual with an eye for the prize has come to the realization that the globalists were correct in this specific instance. To put it another way, the globalists were threatening to relocate.
We can tie them into ours or you can let them win hands down and keep building with the exception of the president and David Saxs who appeared to believe, wait a minute, maybe this is a chance to hook the Chinese on ours rather than go on their own Sputnik way. That was perceived as a globalist argument within the White House.
We can simply say, "Listen, take our Sputnik since they now have their own. It would have been far better for our nation." And now it reminds me of the times we used to ask, you know, they don't have any aircraft carriers. Who are we worried about? After that, they construct aircraft carriers. Piggybacking is their entire strategy.
After which the booster rocket separates. He now says, "I don't even know if I could sell H200s there if there would be the uptake. I am aware." Additionally, he is known for his humility and sense of humor. I was first attracted to him for these reasons. Unlike Sam Alman, he doesn't call me a fool.
A high stupid quotient. That is, Alex Karp has a high level of stupidity. It was considered cruel in the past to call someone a stupid. As I recall, I believe Jensen recognizes the validity of a statement. Look, if you don't get them hooked on the H200, they will build it themselves. Then they did. He has empirically been correct.
Since TSMC is working with us and we have a lot of money moving in this area, I now believe there may be a chance that it's still possible he did. However, commend the president for, in his words, saving our place in the race because of the focus on energy. After listening to him, the president acknowledged that we control the natural gas market, not the wind or solar markets, though we are no longer that awful at either.
However, because natural gas burns less cleanly, no one wants to discuss it. However, I must ask, has he been correct all along? Indeed, you know, these other guys are all acting like they're leaprogging. Next week, Open Eye will have a new chat feature. All right. Now, I'm hosting Salesforce's Mark Benoff tonight.
He did the whole I have discovered Gemini thing, though. He has his own thing, though. However, everyone has something to offer when you visit Slackbot and it gives you instructions. Additionally, they are commodities as Mark stated. Therefore, you must train your own client. But let's not forget that Jensen was ultimately the only one who truly knew.
One generation behind its current flagship processors, Nvidia's H200 chips are being considered for sale to China by the White House. On Capitol Hill, Hang also met with Republicans in the Senate. Lawmakers are debating whether to insert a clause pertaining to the sale of AI chips in a significant defense bill.
However, Bloomberg reports that lawmakers would not include that in the bill, which is a significant victory for Nvidia in its lobbying efforts. Hang told reporters that although he has reservations about selling AI chips to China, he thinks that limitations haven't stopped China's AI development. Let's include Jeff Moon, founder and president of China Moon Strategies and former assistant US trade representative for China and Jimmy P, economic policy analyst at the American Enterprise Institute and CNBC contributor for much more.
Good morning, gentlemen. It's great to have you two here. Jimmy, you will be my first target. Greetings for the morning. I'm glad to have you. As previously stated, I would like to discuss Jensen Hongs efforts on Capitol Hill to oppose any limitations on selling to China. That is undoubtedly a victory for Nvidia, for the administration.
What does it mean? What does the ability of an American CEO to enter Congress and try to influence a decision that might be detrimental to the country's interests mean? Man, we've all seen tech CEOs travel to Washington and get thoroughly interrogated. So, I believe Jensen Huang is the most qualified CEO to come in, provide a compelling argument, and have Washington appear receptive.
That being said, the story does not end here. In terms of direction, I believe the drive will be more constrained rather than more expansive. It is evident that the administration is divided. There are undoubtedly China hawks in the administration who believe that we should slow down China as much as possible and that it's okay if they create their own environment.
Additionally, some individuals believe the Jensen type reasoning that we must be present and that our chips must be available. Democrats, in my opinion, are far more cohesive. However, I believe that politicians are trying to avoid appearing to be lenient toward China. In the event that China surpasses the United States in artificial general intelligence, they do not want to be the ones to say, "Let's sell more chips, more advanced chips." To China, politicians don't want to be in that position.
That seems like a really significant factor. Okay, Jeff, I'll be right over to you. What would happen to the trade relationship between the United States and China if Nvidia and other tech companies were allowed to sell more freely to China? Given that they might be able to somewhat accelerate their AI development using US chips, which would reduce our bargaining strength, is this just a huge win for China?
Pardon the pun, but I would argue that not every negotiating chip in the trade relationship between the United States and China is created equal. I can explain this pretty easily. Washington politicians must decide between long-term national security and Nvidia's short-term financial gain. Jensen is an excellent CEO.
He is attempting to argue that we must strengthen China's reliance on American technology while advancing the goals and financial success of his business. The issue is that since the People's Republic was established in 1949, the Chinese have stated that their long-term goal is to become technologically independent and less dependent on the West.
Jensen's argument is therefore incorrect in this instance. National security which includes both military security where AI is being utilized on the battlefield for drone swarms and economic security protecting our comparative edge in a requires serious attention. Cyber security is being violated by its use.
Anyone who utilizes AI is aware of how unique this is. It's not like real estate transactions, soybeans or airplanes. Yes, but I must ask you, Jeff. China is the source of rare earths we require. Until they can create their own chips, they want ours, at least for the time being. What other choice do you have but giving them the chips?
Because wouldn't restricting rare earths also pose a threat to national security. Doesn't that affect our economy as well? China is seeing what they can get away with and is doing a fantastic job of utilizing rare earths. Additionally, Trump is making a number of compromises. According to a report today, he will not impose sanctions on their CIA.
The Ministry of State Security out of concern for rare earths. Thus, the Chinese will exert pressure on every front. They will not be able to get away with everything. Furthermore, I believe that in order to safeguard our long-term interests, we must firmly stand on this national security issue.
Comments 0