5 ms·
Considering they took a Google executive, this could already be "someone with the right political connections". Google is one of the biggest lobbyists, I would
by chton 12y ago
Considering they took a Google executive, this could already be "someone with the right political connections". Google is one of the biggest lobbyists, I wouldn't be surprised if this had something to do with their efforts.
Still, at least it's somebody with proper qualifications. A techie, not a politician, so I'm hopeful either way.
- ape4 12y agoSeems like their would be a conflict of interest when making decisions about search, web-based mail, self-driving cars, mobile phones,... (Google stuff). But I agree a techie is better than anything else.
- deathhand 12y agoWould you rather have an exec from an ISP instead?(Comcast, Verizon, etc)
- citizens 12y agohttps://fiber.google.com https://fiber.google.com
- maxbrown 12y agoPractically anyone coming from a private tech company would have their own potential conflicts of interest. Personally, I'm far less worried about this revolving door than others.
- indubitably 12y agoWhy?
- Atroxide 12y agoHow do you hire a qualified CTO for the US without having potential conflicts of interest? If you know of anyone qualified for the position but yet doesn't work for a company then I guess I am wrong but having work experience is kind of a requirement.
- snowwrestler 12y agoBecause the CTO does not have any legislative, policy, or regulatory authority. Their only job is to improve the way the U.S. federal government uses technology. What's the fear, that their appointment will lead to a broken IT procurement system rife with conflicts of interest, perverted incentives, and no accountability? That's what we already have now.
- Atroxide 12y agoWouldn't there be a conflict of interest no matter who the CT O of the United States is? Anyone who is qualified for such a position would be coming from another company. The current CTO was a lawyer for Twitter, which you can say there is a conflict of interest there as well.
- SilasX 12y agoDoesn't seem to stop their Sec Treasury appointees from Goldman-Sachs...
- dannyr 12y agoIf there's no conflict of interest, then that CTO is probably not qualified. I can't imagine a CTO not having worked at any of the big tech companies.
- walterbell 12y agoAnyone with decision-making authority will be beset by lobbyists/lawyers. Is industry the only source of talent for industry regulation, or are there academics who have law, policy _and_ domain expertise? Technolgy is rarely neutral, all techies are at least inadvertent politicans. What is the best vehicle for training techies to be civil servants -- lobbying jobs, venture capital, government contracting, academic residency, technical career in government service?
- bduerst 12y agoThat has always been my thought when someone makes ad hominem attacks on political figures who have industry experience. If there is evidence of bias, then we should attack them, but until there is, I would prefer someone with actual industry experience as opposed to a layman with less probability of bias.
- CmonDev 12y agoAlso gender. Public loves under-represented genders.
- azinman2 12y agoIt's not some nameless google exec, but Megan Smith who is a high achieving multidimension awesome person. She's high energy and ambitious with a good heart. She's exactly the kind of person you want in office.
- davidw 12y ago> Google is one of the biggest lobbyists [citation needed], I think. They certainly lobby, but are they one of the biggest? I think that, in reality, a lot of tech companies were kind of lagging in that department until relatively recently.
- chton 12y agohttp://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s&showYear=2014 http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=s&showYea... you're right to ask for a citation, I didn't specifically look it up before making the statement. It seems they are at least top 10 in recent years.