[blurker]

One of the four commissioners (John Reynolds) of the California Public Utilities Commission who voted to approve the expansion previously worked at Cruise [1]. I'm not sure about the others' backgrounds, but that's already 25% of the vote with a conflict of interest.

- https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66478070

[plandis]

I’m not sure having a board comprised without industry experts is a good idea.

[WicWacWok]

Isn't that trivially a conflict of interest?

[fastball]

Usually it goes the other way: being on the board and then being given a position at Cruise. Having worked for a company in the past doesn't mean you like the company or will be soft on them. In fact, many people hate their former employers. So without anything further than "they used to work at a big company in San Francisco", it doesn't seem like a conflict of interest to me.

[WicWacWok]

> Having worked for a company in the past doesn't mean you like the company or will be soft on them.

This often is implied, actually. Better safe than sorry.

[1letterunixname]

But I'm certain having the foxes guarding the hen house is a terrible idea.