MP3 File| Subscribe via iTunes | Add to del.icio.us

Alyssa Rapp is the Founder and CEO of Bottlenotes, an online wine retail business that helps individuals discover and learn about wine. Alyssa started the company while at the Stanford Graduate School of Business, where she headed the school's 500-person wine club. In this interview, Alyssa gives key insights on starting and running a hybrid online retail business, talks about her personal and entrepreneurial story for Bottlenotes, and gives leads to the most amazing wine regions in the world. Her goal for Bottlenotes, she says, is to create the "Pandora of wine".

Alyssa earned a B.A. in Political Science and the History of Art from Yale University in 2000 and an M.B.A. from Stanford University’s Graduate School of Business in 2005. In between her first and second years in business school, she spearheaded the sales and marketing efforts at RO Imports, an importer of boutique New Zealand wines in New York.

Thanks to Julio, iinnovate emeritus, and Roger for contributing to this interview.

- Min Liu of iinnovate

I’ve always been a firm believer in the separation of Church and state. Even as a young child, I intuitively understood then necessity of keeping religion out of public discourse, even though my parents were evangelical fundamentalists.

I’m a believer in the firm separation of church and state because I’ve had the necessity modeled to me in both my parents family. You see, a couple years before I was born quiet a few of my aunts and uncles converted – to different religions and branches of Christianity.

My parents converted to a Protestant Fundamentalist sect, another couple of uncle’s became a Jehovah’s Witnesses, other became just plain Protestant, a whole branch of my Mom’s family became Mormon, along with one of my Dad’s brothers, while other aunt became a practicing Pagan. On my father’s side his parents were nominally Mexican Catholic while my mother’s mother and stepfather were agnostics.

Fired up with the zeal of their new found beliefs family members began immediately trying to save each other and those who took the live and let live approach. Protestant’s fought with each other and with the Catholics (some declared Catholics weren’t really Christians), then ganged up on the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons (whom they considered to be a different religion). Family gatherings became small religious wars in which each participant was determined to prove the others’ religions false. Individuals (such as my parents) began insisting on prayers over meals, which raised the question – whose prayer would be said. Relationships became strained.

Independently, each set of grandparents arrived at the only set of rules which would keep the peace – there would be no discussion of religion at family gatherings, at all. Those who did so would be asked to stop or to leave.

Continue reading "When Everyone Converts to Something Different - Why I Believe in the Necessity of the Separation of Church and State" »

The American Scholar - The Disadvantages of an Elite Education - By William Deresiewicz

I just finished this great essay by a professor at Yale who realizes that he has nothing to say to his plumber; he has no way to make small talk with a lower-middle class guy. Deresiewicz goes on to discuss the three disadvantages of students who graduate from elite universities:

1) You don't know how to talk to people who are not "smart" in the analytical sense (like you are)
2) You get a false sense of self-worth through the way the school bends over backwards for you
3) You lose the ability to accept less than prestigious lives - elite universities do not produce many elementary teachers, artists or poets
4) You don't get a chance to truly explore the intellectual life because you are too busy trying to jump through hoops

It reminded me of Rick Perlstein's essay "What's the matter with College" which I responded to rather viciously. But this essay is either coming at the issue from a different angle (less aggressive, more humble and introspective) or I've just changed my mind over the past year. Maybe a little bit of both.

Even though I've changed career paths from medicine to business (Applied to the Harvard 2+2 program last week), I still agree with the essay's ideas.

One of my friend might make a great teacher, but even his parents told him: "If you wanted to be a teacher, you could have gone to San Jose State. If you go to Stanford, you'll have to do more". So he's applying to law school.

I'm lucky that I've learned a lot about failure through sports - specifically gymnastics. When only one person/team can win, you learn that often, you are not good enough. You learn how to fail and smile and keep trying. There is no equivalent in most other collegiate endeavors.

I daydream about traveling the world, but wonder what my parents and classmates would think. I'm eager to make an impact on the world, but also wish I could spend a whole summer just reading books and playing video games. But how stupid would that be?

Anyway check out the essay and tell me what YOU think. The Disadvantages of an Elite Education

I've blogged about my friend and Stanford alum ('06) Jack Conte on here before, but I couldn't help but put this one up, too. It's a collaboration with Nataly Dawn (aka Natalie Knutsen '09) called "Pas Encore" and released under the collaboration name Pomplamoose.

As if the awesome group name wasn't enough, the song is better. If I were cool enough to say the word bumpin', I would say this song is effortlessly bumpin'. I downloaded the mp3 from Jack's mySpace and have been playing it on my iPod all morning. It's my "new, awesome, hot" song for the summer. And, much like Jack's other YouTube videos, this one was first released in VideoSong format, so there's some fun stuff to watch. A particular delight for you CCRMA folks, I would think.

The CoHo reopened Monday morning, to some Stanford Facebook fanfare, after almost a year of absence. Was it worth the wait?

A friend of mine and I stopped by for lunch to give the "new" old CoHo a try. She ordered a Portobello mushroom sandwich, which came in a clear plastic container and looked encased in two thin slices of Corporate Bread. My friend, a vegetarian for many years said the sandwich had "way too much cheese".

I ordered a Pear and Goat Cheese salad for 7.04 USD with tax, and some minutes later received a small bowl of baby spinach, tiny pear slices, soft bits of goat cheese, and a mild but seemingly omnipresent glaze of oil-based dressing.

We noted the aged wood tables still present, the odd Stanford alum? caricatures on the wall, and a large wall-sized poster of a Spanish matador. It was a quiet, Stanford summer scene, but after that small salad, my stomach asked for more.

I inquired about the provenance of the 1.75 USD Croissants on display, not the ones Satura-made, but the ones the cheery cashier claimed were made in-house by Guillermo, a trained pastry chef, she said. I asked about the flour -- organic and/or refined? She didn't know, just saw all-purpose flour, and Sysco Wholesome Farms butter.

As an artisan baker myself, spoiled by the organic Giusto's flour and (American Humane association Certified) Clover Stornetta organic butter I use when preparing my own Viennoiserie from scratch, I gave the 1.75 USD CoHo-made croissant a try and was somewhat disappointed. Although the execution was good and the visual aesthetics pleasing, the quality of the ingredients, or shall I say the lack thereof, clearly shone through. I put the croissant back in the bag after two bites and left the new old CoHo.

First impressions?

Overall food rating: B+
Ambiance: A-
Sustainability: B (no mention of organic ingredients, dairy sourced from large corporate farms (SYSCO), non-compostable utensils and plastic-heavy food containment)

For a campus that prides itself on being at the vanguard of sustainable food and dining for a college campus, I for one hope we can and will do better.

Finally, it's time for summer, which means eating ice cream, heading to the pool/beach and playing lots of video games. Well, I guess at Stanford that mean doing internships at big companies, working at start-ups, doing research, studying for a standardized test, training for an athletic team or some combination thereof.

I'm taking it easy this summer - just working part-time at the Stanford Calling Program, doing gymnastics training and doing a little work for Gumball Capital. More about that next time.

What are you up to this summer?

While perusing PZ Meyers’ blog I read an interesting entry about a brouhaha brewing up in the paleontological world over alleged theft of naming rights to specimens.

In Summary
A graduate student, Bill Parker, completed his master’s thesis using a New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science specimen

He argued that the specimen was unique enough to warrant its own name and submitted a paper to the Journal of Systematic Paleontology in which he bestowed a new name on the specimen.

The rules of paleontology apparently state that whoever publishes first gets naming rights. I’m not a paleontologist, but apparently naming a new specimen is very important and can make a Paleontologist’s career.

Parker’s article to the Journal of Systematic Paleontology was reviewed by Spencer Lucas.

Here comes the murky and alleged parts:

Lucas then published a paper in an New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science’s in-house publication (which is not peer reviewed) two-weeks prior to the January 2007 publication date of Parker’s article.

Parker is alleging that Lucas used his position in the Museum and as journal reviewer to steal the naming rights away from Parker.

Given the timeline presented, Parker’s allegations have a lot of merit

after the break - the allegations mount

Continue reading "Paleontology Scandals and Alleged Theft from Grad Students" »

I'm on my way to class, but read this and just had to post the article I read in the LA Times -
The California Supreme Court overturned the ban on gay marriage ruling that the state marriage laws are discriminatory! The right to marry the person you love should be a basic human right.

STOP (Students Taking on Poverty) wrapped up its awareness campaigns for the year this week with Food Stamp Awareness Week. Today, the first ever Food Stamp Challenge to take place on a college campus happened here at Stanford.

What is a Food Stamp Challenge? It's the agreement to spend only the amount of money that food stamp recipients receive per week on food - basically, to live off $21 for the week or $3.00 for the day. This movement engages in the Challenge in order to raise awareness of the inadequacy of the average food stamp budget, which has remained the
same since the 1970s.

According to a STOP member Debbie Warshawsky, over 200 people have registered online, pledging to spend no more than $3.00 on food today. STOP provided lunch and dinner to participants in the lobby Old Union today, taking the opportunity to raise awareness of the issue of hunger here in the U.S.

Continue reading "First Ever Food Stamp Challenge on Campus" »

Do you know Lilly Ledbetter? Well, I don’t either (at least not personally), but her story is a familiar tale of women and pay discrimination. Girl meets world, girl gets job, girl works at Goodyear Tire for 20 or so years, girl gets anonymous memo at the brink of her retirement indicating that she has been the victim of chronic pay discrimination (making, on average, 30% less than numerous male peers). Girl’s plea gets rejected by the Supreme Court. Yea, that sounds about right. No, but seriously…

Lilly’s supervisors had prohibited her from discussing pay with her coworkers, enabling this vast discrepancy to persist for her entire professional career. When she did find out though, she brought the charges before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Long story short, Lebetter was awarded a bunch of money for back-pay, punitive damages, anguish etc… only to have it revoked because, well, it took her too long to file the law suit. According to Title VII, discrimination charges must be filed 180 after the initiation of the discrimination. That’s right, even though she found out about the discrimination 20 years after it’s initiation. Read more about it here.

Academics, politicians, and laypeople have all hypothesized about women and the infamous pay gap: women’s inability to negotiate pay, awkward gender dynamics in the workplace, women prioritizing motherhood over the office, etc… but this is a very real example of a woman speaking out against sex-based discrimination (and did I mention she is 70!), and the system is quashing her demand for justice. Senate republicans blocked a bill that would have instituted the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. McCain also spoke out against the bill, claiming that it would enable frivolous lawsuits to hurt big business. I’m speechless…

I found this small image hidden in the corner of the Meyer library stairwell facing the education building (or alternately the clock tower).

from a distance (given that its about 4 inches by 4 inches) I thought I was seeing some sort of abstract flower/lotus design.

The fact that the creationist “documentary” Expelled used more than questionable interview tactics to try to interview Eugenie Scott, P. Z. Myers, Michael Shermer, Hector Avalos, and Richard Dawkin has been circulating around the internet for a couple of months.

By representing themselves as another movie production company (Rampant Film) which was producing a documentary called Crossroads: The Intersection of Science and Religion, Expelled producers (Premise) were able to obtain a couple of interviews with scientists like P.Z. Myers.

Expelled was able to use the interviews because the scientists had signed a release which states the footage can be used for “the feature length documentary tentatively entitled Crossroads (the ‘Documentary’) and/or any other production.”

The questionable interview tactics of Expelled, reflect those used in Borat andthe Ali G Show. These tactics seem to be a more and more prevalent tactic for either groups interviewing someone they think are controversial, or “spoof interviews” a la the Daily Show.

As a grad student who hopes to go on to research and teach in a university, this has made me think about what I want to do if I’m ever asked to be interviewed, to help members of the press, to go on a show (radio, tv, or otherwise), or to participate in a documentary. While the odds of appearing in a film are pretty low, it might be easy get suckered into participating in a podcast, interview for a newspaper, journal, etc. with a group you object to or know will misrepresent your work. This is particularly difficult to avoid if they use the tactic that the Premise production team did, and set up shell identities (including fake webpages).

While academics want their viewpoints disseminated and are often willing to participate in documentaries, be interviewed for articles and news stories, and help journalists, maybe, they also need to start thinking about how to protect themselves from this kind of exploitation.

For starters, scholars need to closely look at the release forms they sign and decide if the standard “any other production” is ok with them. Maybe a modification, in which they need to give permission for each new use of their interview is something some scholars should start considering adding to the release forms. Maybe even crossing out the phrase (and initialing and dating it) is as far as they want to go (also making a photocopy of the document).

Another tool that universities could develop is a contract that faculty members can use which production companies will need to sign if they want to interview the faculty member.

The contract could contain provisions (translated into legalese) which state:
- the production company is not misrepresenting itself to the scholar
- the production company is not misrepresenting the film to the scholar
- if the scholar is participating without being paid, that the film is not a for profit enterprise (aka Borat)
- the production company will pay some sort of compensation if it has misrepresented itself or the film to the scholar
- the production company will pay for the legal fees of the scholar to enforce this contract

Not being interview is a chance that scholars will take, if they adopt this kind of tactic, but given the fact that “spoof interviews” and misrepresentations are occurring, maybe not being interviewed by someone sketchy is a good thing. Each scholar needs to gauge their own preferences. On the other hand, your area of study can dictate the types of interviews you get asked to do.

If a production company refuses to change the “any other production” language or sign the interview contract, scholars need to make sure they know who they are dealing with, particularly famous and/or controversial scholars.

As for myself, I'm only a grad student, but I’ve already been volunteered once by the university institute to talk to, and help, a member of the press under the mistaken assumption that I did research in a particular area. The poor researcher got a, “I study a completely unrelated area, and I’m not sure who studies this, but I think X does…” from me.

The experience got me thinking about this whole thing in the first place, particularly as I had just read about P.Z. Myer’s expulsion from Expelled.

ASES SUMMIT 2008
APRIL 6-12, 2008
"Fostering a Global Entrepreneurial Community"
asessummit.stanford.edu | ases.stanford.edu

* Keynote and Speaker Events are FREE and OPEN TO THE PUBLIC *

Scott D. Cook
Founder, Intuit, Inc.
Monday, April 7, 2008
5:15-6:30PM | Building 320, Room 105, Stanford University
Link to map: http://campus-map.stanford.edu/index.cfm?ID=01-320

Daniel Walker Former
Chief Talent Officer, Apple, Inc.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
6:00-7:15PM | Building 420, Room 041, Stanford University
Link to map: http://campus-map.stanford.edu/index.cfm?ID=01-420

Munjal Shah, CEO, Like.com Inc.
Vineet Buch, Principal, BRV
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
1:00-2:15PM | CIS-X Auditorium, Stanford University
Link to map: http://campus-map.stanford.edu/index.cfm?ID=01-370

Adeo Ressi
Founding Member, TheFunded.com
Thursday, April 10, 2008
6:00-7:30PM | Building 370, Room 370, Stanford University
Link to map: http://campus-map.stanford.edu/index.cfm?ID=01-370

Joel Peterson
Lead Director, jetBlue Airways
Friday, April 11, 2008
5:00-6:45PM | Building 550, Room 550A, Stanford University
Link to map: http://campus-map.stanford.edu/index.cfm?ID=02-550

ASES SUMMIT 2008 Stanford Directors: Christian Tabing, '09; In Ho Lee, '09; and Wen Qi Chin, '09.

Continue reading "ASES SUMMIT 2008 | Stanford University" »

All Spring Break, I've had this song stuck in my head. This is a cover of "Feel Good Inc" by Gorillaz. Done by Jack Conte, '06 and posted on YouTube:

Direct link to video
Jack's YouTube Channel
Jack's mySpace

A few weeks ago, a friend and I hosted a program at the Women’s Center about queer representation in the mainstream media, and specifically how queer women are depicted on the Showtime hit drama, The L Word . It’s hard to watch this show and not have an opinion, and apparently lots of people do. Ultimately, the shows’ aim is entertainment, and while we are not expecting confrontational questions of paradigm challenging proportions, is it that unreasonable to ask for a little diversity? All of the characters fit the classic mold of a Hollywood drama, white, tall, thin, beautiful, rich, trendy, and in this case, gay. While their are characters of color that intermittently make appearances on the show, and socioeconomic diversity is hinted at times, the show glosses over all of the nuance, and fails to address the hard-hitting questions that are asked about female homosexuality. I guess you just can’t expect that much from Hollywood.

On the other hand, an informal survey conducted at our event indicates that queer women at Stanford, though they acknowledge the shows’ limitations, feel that some representation is better than no representation. The show is the first and only of it’s kind on air today, but its merits are dubious at best.

What do you guys think?

I saw this in front of Meyer yesterday. It is a response to the exposure of bathroom graffiti that occurred last week.

Here are some images:

Continue reading "Response to "Bathroom Wall" Art Project" »

Last week, on March 6, Apple released the developer’s kit for the iPhone. With this kit, Apple has handed the keys of the iPhone to developers, opening up the device to third party applications.

This is a huge step in the evolution of the iPhone. Already hugely successful, the iPhone boasts sales numbers of 4 million units, second only to RIM, the maker of the Blackberry. With the release of the developer kit, the iPhone will be able to have expandability previously unseen. Up until now, all iPhone applications were web-based, or they were small fringe applications hacked together by a small community. Apple’s newly released developer’s kit allows programmers to tap into the iPhone and use its resources to their full potential.

With the addition of third party applications, the iPhone looks much more attractive. Many people held off on the iPhone because of its previous lack of third party applications, and understandably so. Often times, it is the third party applications that make a device useful or desirable, and without it, we would be stuck with what Apple wanted to give us. New possibilities are available now. AOL plans its instant messaging client for the iPhone. A PDA medical software company promises to create a application that allows doctors to identify pills with the iPhone. Also, several games have been ported, in just two weeks. SEGA’s “SuperMonkeyBall” and EA’s “Spore” have been ported in just two weeks. Both of these games use the iPhone’s built-in accelerometer for the controls.

Many iPhone owners, myself included, have been waiting the the release of the iPhone for the support of third party applications. The software update that supports third party applications will be released in late June and will also be available for the iPod Touch for a fee. The following months should be very exciting for iPhone owners...

John L. Hennessy is the 10th President of Stanford University and a pioneer of computer architecture.


MP3 File | Subscribe via iTunes | Add to del.icio.us

John Hennessy started at Stanford as an associate professor in Electrical Engineering in 1977 and assumed Presidency in 2000. A technologist at the core, President Hennessy pioneered a computer assembly language called MIPS in 1981 and started a company, MIPS Computer Systems, in 1984. As Stanford’s 10th president, he oversees the University from various perspectives and sits at the intersection of academics, technology, and the corporate world.

In this interview, he talks about his role as the President, the early years of running a startup, current issues Stanford University faces, and the future of information technology. He also gives advice to prospective students and budding entrepreneurs.

He is currently on the board at Google, Cisco Systems, and Atheros Communications, and has written two foundational books on computer architecture and assembly language.

- Min Liu of iinnovate

Walking down the streets of Santiago (or anywhere else in Chile or Argentina) female Stanford students can expect to receive acknowledgement that they are attractice. The person acknowledging their beauty can be a taxi driver, a man walking down the street, construction workers, or anyone else.

The acknowledgement can range from slightly funny but still tasteful (my favorites are the man in Mendoza, Argentina that told a friend and I “you two, you are very pretty,” and the clerk in the Santiago shoe store that told me I had very beautiful eyes); to the still amusing but slightly annoying- whistles, claps, loud kissy noises; and then the worst- the men who just stare at you on the subway and do not look away, or the college aged boys who lean into your personal bubble space when you walk by to say “linda” or beautiful.

We’ve discussed this in our Spanish classes here at the Stanford in Santiago center, and my Spanish teacher strongly defends it as a cultural practice, insisting that it is a compliment to our looks. Yet in our discussions most of the (US) girls in the room indicated that it made them uncomfortable, that it made them feel like they were only a sexual object. I know from my personal experience I’ve avoided walking past certain groups of guys because I don’t want to feel uncomfortable. And yet even listening to all of us describe our feelings of uncomfortableness, and thinking that we’re just sexual objects, my Spanish teacher still maintains that it’s a compliment, and we should take it as such.

Continue reading "Cultural difference or Sexism? Compliment or degrading? " »