<p>I don’t find that the editorials in the Daily often reflect my POV or that of my friends. (Trenchant analysis isn’t their strong suit.) Most of the people I know here do share my sense of optimism, since we’re actually here and immersed in all aspects of the experience, rather than relying on brief glimpses from the outside. </p>
<p>Some students do work collaboratively with faculty to create marketable products. However, it isn’t correct to assume that they are all for profit. Many of these collaborations result in items such as inexpensive solutions to water access in sub-Saharan African areas; low-cost, portable incubators for babies born in remote villages; inexpensive, scalable solar panels for equatorial countries; and many other things. Certainly there are also some groups developing for-profit products and systems, and others creating intellectual property from which they may benefit, as at many universities. (Stanford generally retains rights for IP developed on campus by its affiliates, though.) But the overall picture is much more diverse, and much more focused on social benefit, than some media accounts indicate, since it’s easier to just take a narrow angle and go with it for the sake of a story.</p>
<p>The main balance against excess corporate influence is the always-ongoing dialogue about the subject among the various constituent groups here. As I said, the synergistic power between Stanford and SV is a long-standing phenomenon, even if it only recently became the “story du jour” in some of the popular press. People here have long been aware that such power requires conscientious stewardship as the university grows in its influence. Due to its future orientation and its vast array of academic strengths, Stanford is, IMO, best equipped of any university to meet the countless challenges of the 21st century–including challenges to the historical model of higher education itself. That’s one of the main reasons I’m here.</p>