Sam Altman says Stanford is a negative signal

At treehacks, sam altman said that stanford is becoming a "negative signal" for raising money

he talked about how, historically, stanford undergrad had an advantage and was "very well connected to the whole... VC machinery" and VC firms were "extremely focused on Stanford as like a source of ideas and people"

brings up a question -- why is it that some are now viewing stanford as a negative signal?

probably a consequence of advertising oneself as a startup school, attracting those wanting to be startup founders

this is probably why MIT undergrad (and to some extent, Harvard) have been winning AI...

you produce good engineers who are intellectually curious -- and then work on problems that they have genuine interest in (and problems that actually need to be solved)

as opposed to chasing after a quick exit, e.g.

* important distinction --> founders only. Stanford students work at some of the best startups, but it seems like the best startups have not recently been founded stanford undergrad dropouts etc.

** best startups = recent ai unicorns like mercor, cursor, cognition(?), etched, ...