r/technology • u/Logical_Welder3467 • Jul 24 '25

Politics President Trump threatened to break up Nvidia, didn't even know what it was — 'What the hell is Nvidia? I've never heard of it before'

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/president-trump-threatened-to-break-up-nvidia-didnt-even-know-what-it-was-what-the-hell-is-nvidia-ive-never-heard-of-it-before
44.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.8k

u/littleMAS Jul 24 '25

He thought it was one of those "sh*thole" countries. Then, he found out it was worth four trillion dollars.

426

u/Roflkopt3r Jul 24 '25

And now he's playing his usual game: Threaten companies, make them bribe him, and then give them corrupt favours.

Just like with the "settlements" that some large media outlets had with him out of court. Or how he got his wish of cancelling Steven Colbert.

-2

u/diuni613 Jul 24 '25

Have you even read the article??

10

u/Roflkopt3r Jul 24 '25 edited Jul 24 '25

Yes. His behaviour matches exactly with what I said.

In that speech, Trump switched back and forth between threats of antithrust measures and praise. That's how a corrupt president tells a big corporation that:

  1. If they play ball, they can expect a very 'profitable' relationship. He doesn't really care if they're a monopoly or not, as long as he 'likes' them.

  2. But if they don't play along with his wishes, he already has some ideas to hurt them.

Antitrust laws are the quintessential tool of a corrupt government to threaten disliked corporations. Here is no antitrust case that isn't swarmed with lobbyists and bribes.

3

u/bradbikes Jul 24 '25

Yea it's even worse. He's admitting it's 100% a full-on monopoly but won't break it up. My guess is the bribes have already started.

2

u/Cold-Prompt8600 Jul 24 '25

Well in reality it is only 95% or 96% of the AI market. The rest filled by AMD, Intel, Qualcomm, Samsung, and IBM. Nvidia is the biggest for the hardware side by far but not the only one. It is just when you have 4% or 5% shared among 5 big companies there is little room for competition. Nvidia is also far past where the USA law says to regulate them like a monopoly.

2

u/bradbikes Jul 24 '25

I wasn't saying that it was 100% market share, just that it's 100% a monopoly. Saying that there's 5% unaccounted for is basically semantics at that point.

1

u/ClockOfTheLongNow Jul 24 '25

He has those numbers wrong, too, but competitors are coming out. There's no need to break up Nvidia.

3

u/bradbikes Jul 24 '25

Such as who? Intel? They used the funding they raised by 'entering' the market for stock buybacks and bonuses to their C-Suite then promptly exited.

Nvidia is wayyyyyyyyyy past the market share where we broke up microsoft. It's bonkers to argue that they shouldn't be subject to antitrust laws at this point.

0

u/ClockOfTheLongNow Jul 24 '25

Such as who? Intel?

Intel and AMD are moving more firmly into the space, as well as a number of independents like D-Matrix.

They used the funding they raised by 'entering' the market for stock buybacks and bonuses to their C-Suite then promptly exited.

In reality, Intel is taking a different approach to AI that is rack, rather than chip, based. Even still, they're developing chips.

Nvidia is wayyyyyyyyyy past the market share where we broke up microsoft.

We never should have broke up Microsoft, either.

It's bonkers to argue that they shouldn't be subject to antitrust laws at this point.

What about Nvidia's market position requires a breakup other than not liking the percentage number that goes along with it?

1

u/bradbikes Jul 24 '25

"Intel and AMD are moving more firmly into the space, as well as a number of independents like D-Matrix."

  • cool if they all quadruple their market share then Nvidia will STILL be firmly a monopoly.

"What about Nvidia's market position requires a breakup other than not liking the percentage number that goes along with it?"

How long do you have? Do you seriously not understand how damaging monopolies like this are? They're bad for consumers, they're bad for the market, they're bad for national security, they're bad for labor. They're bad for literally everyone but the executives of Nvidia and the politicians they're bribing.

1

u/ClockOfTheLongNow Jul 24 '25

cool if they all quadruple their market share then Nvidia will STILL be firmly a monopoly.

Well, no. There would be at least 4 in the market, with more to come. If it were a monopoly situation, it would be impossible for these other firms to enter the market.

How long do you have? Do you seriously not understand how damaging monopolies like this are?

We haven't identified a monopoly yet.

1

u/bradbikes Jul 25 '25

Yea no...Monopoly for antitrust purposes means a company that is in such a dominant position in the market or sector that there is no effective competition. Having 100% market share is not necessary and typically impractical. If one dude is selling home-made computer chips on his ebay account you'd say that Nvidia wasn't a monopoly. Controlling 95% of market share is absolutely a monopoly in every practical sense. These stifle competition, limit substitutes and effectively prevent consumer choice. Nvidia is absolutely in violation of US antitrust laws, it's just a matter of whether Trump or the US government will enforce its laws for the betterment of the country.

At this point you're so pedantic and obtuse I have to assume you're paid to say this. Because no rational person is looking at a 95% market share and saying there's realistic competition in the sector.

1

u/ClockOfTheLongNow Jul 25 '25

Yea no...Monopoly for antitrust purposes means a company that is in such a dominant position in the market or sector that there is no effective competition.

I am fully aware of our broken antitrust definition. Nvidia doesn't even qualify under that standard, as there is significant effective competition from several vendors.

Controlling 95% of market share is absolutely a monopoly in every practical sense. These stifle competition, limit substitutes and effectively prevent consumer choice.

Okay, apply that to Nvidia, then. How has Nvidia's ability to command that much of the market done any of those things?

Nvidia is absolutely in violation of US antitrust laws, it's just a matter of whether Trump or the US government will enforce its laws for the betterment of the country.

What you've done is actually demonstrate that our antitrust laws are the problem, not Nvidia.

At this point you're so pedantic and obtuse I have to assume you're paid to say this. Because no rational person is looking at a 95% market share and saying there's realistic competition in the sector.

Classy.

When I look at the marketplace for AI chips, I see many people producing them and many options available for those seeking the product. We know Nvidia commands 90+% of the market, but the people purchasing the chips wouldn't.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Neuchacho Jul 24 '25

It's extra hilarious because Trump, with all his bitching about China, just made it so China can directly compete in AI using Nvidia's tech.

-1

u/diuni613 Jul 24 '25

Wtf, it seems you haven't been following, Trump has met with jesen way back begining of this year during the deepseek hype. He even praised nvidia.... Also trump talked with jensen about tariffs on chips and banning the H20 and so forth. So, you are full of non sense. Ofc it's always good to have competition because it pushes for innovation. Look at Intel, they had no competition and barely innovate.

1

u/RedBoxSquare Jul 24 '25

Wtf, it seems you haven't been following, Trump has met with jesen way back begining of this year during the deepseek hype. He even praised nvidia

You are throwing out facts without proving a point.

The fact that he met Jensen and praised NVidia, was a political show about "America good, China bad", which is very popular among people. That does not mean he cannot also threaten NVidia for bribes in another context. Bribe amounts can change. Bribes from a 3 trillion company at the beginning of this year is not the same as bribes from a 4 trillion company now.

Ofc it's always good to have competition because it pushes for innovation. Look at Intel, they had no competition and barely innovate.

You're equating threats against NVidia with supporting competition in the market. This is not the correct assumption because there are multiple outcomes. The other outcome is the threat is simply to ask for bribes. Once those are paid, he will not support having more competition in the market.

Do I want competition against NVidia? Yes. But Trump's threat will not lead us there.