Also how does donating a $1000 to a controversial cause, compare to the new member's past "achievements" ?
What would you do if you were the CEO of Dropbox ?
Running a company at that size becomes very difficult, and lonely, when you're at the top. You have to assume there are many factors which will never be shared publicly. Until you're that person, it's a bad decision to judge.
Unfortunately most people have never been in that position and hence don't have the perspective to understand, which is why they immediately jump to their own fear-based conclusions of self-interest.
One might assume the amount of data involved, and multi-national interest in security, may induce the necessity to seek assistance from someone who has previously navigated those waters --- regardless of previous behavior.
The Chicago Cubs may be the worst baseball franchise in history, but if I'm getting into owning a major league team and the Wrigley Family has relationships and experience ---- it would be tremendously beneficial to have them on board -- even if they haven't won a World Series in over 100 years and make decisions I don't support.
My guess is they just need help navigating the insanely complex global landscape with the assistance of someone with experience and relationships.
Drew is a smart person who's done a great job building his company. Think that's going to change now? Not a chance. There are bigger forces at play here we'll never understand. Speculation, including mine, is futile.
To summarize, hookers and cocaine. That's what I'd do as CEO of Dropbox. ;)
Business is business and a cup of tea is a cup of tea!
Suffice to look that lobbyists outnumber Congress representatives in Washington (last time I checked it was 4 to 1, if my memory serves me well).
The reason is that a business must generate profits, and a business doesn't live "out there in the ether", it is a moral entity bound by laws. The word is laws. So its very existence, and the way it generates profits are regulated. There is a direct influence of laws on its profits, so the incentive for a business to influence the laws that influence its profits is one of the first things that will pop up in someone's head.
"Tax is X% by this law.. I wonder if we could change this.. Do I know someone who'd be able to influence ?".
And this, on a small scale. Imagine what it's like for big companies, and people from big companies who change their careers for a Government career. Is it safe to assume that they still hold affection (didn't want to say allegiance) to their old company ? It is safe to asume so, it is human after all.
We need not to see further than former employees of big bangs, pharmaceutical companies and oil companies who became part of the Government Administration to see that saying "mixing business and politcs is a bad mix" may be true, but it still happens. It's not like one can just wipe out memory from someone who's worked at a company for 20 years.