Men are easy.
Jensen Huang has been caught like Winnie the Pooh, with his hands in the honey jar. Of course, it isn't his fault that his piece on the side of his marriage turned out to be a suspected spy for China, because he is only human, and a man. Plus, as the CEO of one of the world's most valuable companies that was forced to limit chip availability to China, he was always going to be a target. Yet, like the majority of people who use AI to make images, porn, automate their jobs and self-diagnose mental problems, he failed to ask the questions that matter. With all that AI computing power at his fingertips, he should have asked:
Perhaps with a few prompts he could have done some risk mitigation and made more informed decisions about his private life. But hey, as a man like many other men, he is probably pretty easy to manipulate by women. Which as one of the most powerful CEOs in the world, it then of course raises an interesting question.
Workplace power dynamics.
While Jensen and Alice (both with last name Huang) did not work together at the same company, the honey trap approach has been used for centuries, because it is well-established that especially men are susceptible to relationship manipulation, no matter their rank, worth or position in society. But if men are susceptible to this kind of manipulation, what kinds of things need to be considered. Does a man really have power over women in the workplace, even if he is ranked higher? Is it possible that women have power over men, even if ranked lower on the org chart? Is the org chart an adequate tool for assessing the weight of power dynamics?
Personally, in most cases, I do not think that the power dynamics that get cited are usually valid when adults of expected sound mind are involved. Adults can make decisions and in most cases, even if there is the potential for career punishment, an adult can make the decision to not get involved. If an adult does get involved in order to protect or serve their career, that is a decision made even if it might come with future regrets. This might be different under various situations, but the org chart evaluation assumes that because a person is positioned higher at a company, they are automatically more powerful than those below across every aspect that matters for a relationship.
Do you think that is the case?
By a similar evaluation, a person should not be allowed to date a person of significantly lower wealth, because the disparity creates a power dynamic and the potential change in economic conditions for the poorer party too much a manipulation. But money is not the only power gap, is it? Looks could also be evaluated where someone who is considered good looking creates too much of an influencing factor over someone who is not. Or, because men are susceptible to the charms of women, does that mean that the power differential is too asymmetric?
A Honeytrap is a relationship strategy, but all intentional actions to build relationships are strategies, are they not? When I met my now wife, I likely employed strategies (badly) to try and influence her impression with me in the hope of dating, marriage, children. Was she trapped? Or was it me who was lured into the relationship by her beauty and grace that is far, far above my own comparative values. Of course at the time, we had no state secrets to divulge to each other, nor were we employed by a rival state actor to do so.
But, do you think that the CIA or MI5 don't do this kind of thing in other countries. Russian SVR? Both politics and big business are not cleanly played games, which means at least all the large players are involved in various forms of espionage. They do this, because it works. Which means that while Jensen Huang of Nvidia has been compromised, the question is - how many others are compromised? Just look at all of the potential names that have been kept out of the newspapers tied to Epstein's pedo island, all the way up to the very top of country governments.
Honeytrap coverup?
I think from the amount of people who are caught in compromising circumstances, I would say it is a drop in the ocean of those who are actually involved. That means that there is a large hidden industry of very powerful people who have a lot of influence, being influenced. For whatever reason, the FBI has decided to single out this case, while a whole lot more that they know about are conveniently swept under the rug. And this guy was cheating on his wife, not sexually abusing children.
In terms of power dynamics, who is facilitating the coverups?
Some have their hands in the honey jar, a few with theirs in the money jar.
Taraz [ Gen1: Hive ]
Be part of the Hive discussion.
- Comment on the topics of the article, and add your perspectives and experiences.
- Read and discuss with others who comment and build your personal network
- Engage well with me and others and put in effort
And you may be rewarded.
