Re: on the irresponsibility of pursuing C language reform

["G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1799 bytes --]

Hi Sam & Alex,

Just a quick note on conflicts on interest since I'm the one who dragged
that label into the conversation--though the concept was implicitly
present already.

At 2026-08-01T15:38:42+0100, Sam James wrote:
> Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org> writes:
> > FWIW, regarding the possible conflict of interest that was mentioned
> > yesterday, I'll say that I don't get paid for my contributions to
> > ISO C as a member of WG14.  There's no benefit to me other than
> > public recognition.  I'll also disclose the exact quantity that I've
> > been paid for maintaining the Linux man-pages project:
> 
> You can have a conflict of interest in responsibliity without money
> being involved. In fact, I have never believed you were influenced by
> money,

Sam makes a good point, and Alex, I think you overlooked one.

Disclosure of the quantity of your compensation as Linux man-pages
maintainer is of less importance than _who_ sponsored your work.

When we're speaking of currency, yes, quantity eventually has a quality
all its own.  But knowing who's been signing the checks is almost always
the more valuable information because it tells us who is in a position
to expect favorable treatment.  Sometimes that's because the parties
negotiate a quid pro quo, but more often sponsors can count on
"self-regulation" by their beneficiaries.  Money men understand that
people's minds and uncritical loyalties can often be bought cheaply.

Free your mind and something else will follow, I think someone said.

Here's a backgrounder that's less antiseptic than a corporate ethics
slide deck training module on conflicts of interest.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-money-complaints-sparked-resignation-fears-scotus

Regards,
Branden

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]