×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

How Engineers and Scientists Cluster In the U.S.

timothy posted about a year ago | from the you-forgot-seattle dept.

Stats 79

First time accepted submitter DERoss writes "The National Science Foundation has published a research paper titled Regional Concentrations of Scientists and Engineers In the United States. The lead paragraph contains the sentence 'The three most populous states — California, Texas, and New York — together accounted for more than one-fourth of all S&E employment in the United States.' According to the 2010 census, however, those three states also contain more than one-fourth (26.5%) percent of the U.S. population. In other words, there is no concentration beyond how the general population is concentrated." The clustering is studied with finer granularity than the per-state level, though, and the paper names several places (like the Santa Clara area, and Houston) where such jobs are particularly prevalent.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first ! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665029)

first post !

Re:first ! (2)

maxwell demon (590494) | about a year ago | (#44665147)

Has anyone done research on the regional concentration of first posters?

Re:first ! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665189)

Yes, they live on Goat Island, in the middle of the Goat Sea.

Re:first ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665187)

What's the concentration in Dumbfuckistan (aka flyover country)?

Re: first ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665211)

hope they nuke your part of the country lol asshole

Re: first ! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666529)

hope they nuke your part of the country lol asshole

You should be used for biological research. Monkeys are
more valuable than scum like you.

Re:first ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44667867)

I hope you die in a wildfire (west coast) or a hurricane (east coast). Oh, and Texas is definitely in Dumbfuckistan by the way.

What is the point? (1, Insightful)

LikwidCirkel (1542097) | about a year ago | (#44665055)

Can someone please explain to me what the point of this is? Even the summary suggests there is no point. The is the worst slow-news-day posting I've ever seen here.

Re: What is the point? (1)

dnadoc (3013299) | about a year ago | (#44665139)

Horrible summary. The article points out states with larger numbers of tech per capita too - and by this measure, DC, Maryland, and Virginia are a leading cluster.

Re: What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665395)

It's the same place. Differentiating between DC, Arlington, MoCo, Fairfax County, Loudoun, etc. are stupid, since they are so interconnected. Even more so than the Bay area.

Re: What is the point? (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44665521)

It's the same place.

Probably why the GP said "are a leading cluster" instead of "are leading clusters".

Re: What is the point? (4, Insightful)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44665447)

by this measure, DC, Maryland, and Virginia are a leading cluster

It's called "pork". I frequently travel to the Rockville-Gaithersburg-Germantown corridor of Maryland on business, and I never fail to be amazed just how much STEM work is there, and in nearby areas, mostly sucking off the government teat. I know it extends well beyond STEM, but that's the part of it that's most visible to me. It's nice to know the rest of the country's tax dollars are going towards keeping the people there fat and happy, while most of the rest of the country limps along.

Re: What is the point? (0)

mjwalshe (1680392) | about a year ago | (#44665631)

you know that (milatery rnd) is how SV got started?

Re: What is the point? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665717)

you know that (milatery rnd) is how SV got started?

What the fuck does "milatery" mean? Retard.

Re: What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666009)

It means slashdot is not an English class.

Re: What is the point? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666549)

It means slashdot is not an English class.

Are you a defender of the illiterate, perhaps because you are yourself illiterate ?

Just remember this : you and your kind will BOW DOWN and suck the balls
of those who have more education than you do. And you will tell them you LIKE IT,
because otherwise you will be living on welfare. You idiots who like to believe that
grammar, spelling, and other communication skills don't matter are from the SERVANT
class, not the ruling class.

Get on your knees, and smile, because you are going to embrace your love
for your own stupidity.

Re: What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44669791)

I really miss the days when reading /. was interesting, informative and at least minimally respectful. Yet another spot on the run over by people too enamored with their own voice. Where have all real geeks with real data gone?

Re: What is the point? (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44666207)

That's true to some extent, but lots of places have gotten some federal spending (both legitimate and pork). The DC area is an endless hog trough.

Re: What is the point? (1)

mjwalshe (1680392) | about a year ago | (#44670023)

Ah thats what all the senators and congressmen say I am pure as the driven snow and the other states are all money grubbing swine.

You need to have rules of debate that ban sneaking non related items into the motion which is how a lot of the worst pork gets passed.

Re: What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44669147)

Shockley's mother was not into miltary R&D.

Re: What is the point? (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44669441)

Yes she was, but it was so secret at the time that she couldn't reveal what she was doing.

Almost as importantly, almost all of Fairchild's very early IC production was sold to the military.

Re: What is the point? (1)

devman (1163205) | about a year ago | (#44666105)

You should try VA 267 from McLean to Ashburn and to a lesser extent from Sterling to Centreville on VA 28. Tech and defense companies abound.

history of "engineering" - Da Vinci et. al. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44668613)

1 - watch the movie "Real Genius"
2 - read some [expletive deleted] history
3 - read the "military industrial complex" speech, two or three time as a minimum
4 - watch "samaratin snare"

Then answer the question please, are you a Pakled?

To quote "Red" - dumbass - it is where the easy money is.

Re: What is the point? (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about a year ago | (#44666191)

Massachusetts is higher than Virginia, but there's a definite concentration around DC. The lowest rates of S&E employment are in Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana and South Dakota.

Re: What is the point? (0)

Tokolosh (1256448) | about a year ago | (#44666319)

DC, Maryland, and Virginia are a leading cluster.

If you drill down, you will see that "social sciences" are included, which is what boosts this cluster. Including "social" as a science fails the whole thing. They might as well have included the Dismal Science.

In related news ... (2)

PPH (736903) | about a year ago | (#44665161)

... bears spotted shitting in the woods. Story at 11.

Re:In related news ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665217)

"The National Science Foundation has published a research paper titled Regional Concentrations of Bear Shit In the United States. The lead paragraph contains the sentence 'The three most populous states — Alaska, Washington and Minnesota — together accounted for more than one-fourth of all bear shit in the United States.' According to the 2010 bear count, however, those three states also contain more than one-fourth (26.5%) percent of the U.S. bear population. In other words, there is no concentration of bear shit beyond how the general bear population is concentrated."

Re:What is the point? (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about a year ago | (#44665173)

The is the worst slow-news-day posting I've ever seen here.

Stick around a few more days; you'll see worse.

Re:What is the point? (4, Funny)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#44665191)

stick around a few days and see the dupes of the worst

Re:What is the point? (3, Insightful)

Antique Geekmeister (740220) | about a year ago | (#44665177)

Knowing where the engineers cluster, and why, can help plan industries or plan job hunting. The clustering also strongly affects engineer salaries and competitive skills, and where to plan conferences of engineering or computer science. And fine granularity can be very helpful for start-up companies, advancing to mid-size companies, who need a larger pool of qualified employees as they move to larger offices.

Conversely, knowing where the _managers_ like to work is important as well. I know competent engineers who literally can get nothing done because their managers call them in for 3 or 4 meetings on the same day, demanding status reports on the projects the engineers would be working on if they weren't in meetings. This is partly because they are in cramped offices where the managers can reach them too easily and keep trying to micromanage the engineers, asking "when will you have a fix for this" and recording it on Gant charts.

Re:What is the point? (1)

Quasimodem (719423) | about a year ago | (#44665861)

I should imagine that scientists and engineers in the United States cluster around wherever the work and research is being done, same as they do in other countries.

truism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666151)

so they cluster where they cluster?

The point is.... (2)

TapeCutter (624760) | about a year ago | (#44667449)

The study is about testing a common-sense assumption. As other's have pointed out the study has basically confirmed that "a bear shits in the woods". But that's what most science is about, identifying a common-sense assumption that does not hold up under scrutiny, eg "time and space are constants". As in most cases, the common-sense assumption was upheld in this study. Sure it's not very interesting as a news story, but make no mistake, there is a point.

Re:What is the point? (4, Informative)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about a year ago | (#44665203)

Can someone please explain to me what the point of this is?

The point is to give someone an excuse to post a link to the relevant xkcd [xkcd.com] .

Re:What is the point? (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | about a year ago | (#44665621)

They couldn't have done a THX-1138 comic?

Re:What is the point? (1)

MicktheMech (697533) | about a year ago | (#44665353)

I suppose you can take it as confirmation of other research that American production is flat [nytimes.com] . Meaning that there isn't a lot of geographic variation (except in agriculture) in what people do in different states.

But then, even at the end of his post, Krugman concedes that there's not much point to the analysis.

Re:What is the point? (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about a year ago | (#44665415)

The summary is wrong. The submitter even contradicts himself. He states that the four biggest states do not have a population-representative number of scientists and engineers, implying there is clustering not in those states, then insists there is no clustering.

Re: What is the point? (1)

nbritton (823086) | about a year ago | (#44667987)

What ever the case, IBM's three state side research centers are located in... wait for it...

IBM Research - Almaden: San Jose, California
IBM Research - Austin: Austin, Texas
IBM Research - Watson: Yorktown Heights, New York

  For anyone who hasn't been to Austin, it's call Silicon Hills for a reason. Texas (Austin, Dallas, Ft Worth) is the second largest tech epicenter behind California. The rest of the jobs are in the DC / New York area, typically government contracts. These three places (CA, TX, NY/DC/MD/VA METRO) capture probably 75% of the market.

We know how Silicon Valley got started, but why Texas? Don't get me wrong, I love Texas, but I don't understand how tech got such a strong foothold in Austin.

Re:What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665501)

The submitter thinks he spotted a fallacy in an NSF's report about the geographical dispersion of engineers. However, the sentence s/he quoted did not draw a conclusion, it just seemed to be present a fact to help orient the user.

Re:What is the point? (3, Insightful)

radarskiy (2874255) | about a year ago | (#44665661)

The summary says that there is no state-level clustering shown by the 3 most populous states, not that there is no clustering whatsoever. (I think the main implication is that these states are so large that they behave like they are more than one state.)

Table 1 shows 4.1% of all workers across the country are in science and engineering, and the spread for NY, CA and TX is 3.6-4.9, so they're pretty close. However, there are other states that stray quite far from this, such as Mississippi at 1.7% to DC at 10.7%.

The paper then goes on to suggest that there may be clustering at the municipal level or by field, but unfortunately does not show the "intensity" figures for those cases.

Re:What is the point? (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | about a year ago | (#44665729)

Well, we could start with the fact that, just because 25% of the Science and Engineering population can be found in an area that constitutes 25% of the total population, that in no way indicates that " ... there is no concentration beyond how the general population is concentrated." If you read the conclusions of the submitter and take them to the bank, you will generally be disappointed with the dividends.

Re:What is the point? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665957)

It's Saturday. Go outside and play fatass.

Re:What is the point? (1)

slick7 (1703596) | about a year ago | (#44666517)

Can someone please explain to me what the point of this is? Even the summary suggests there is no point. The is the worst slow-news-day posting I've ever seen here.

Can someone please explain to me what the point of this is?

The terse answer is, beyond your grasp.
The sarcastic answer is, up an MBA's (More Bean-counting Assholes) ass.
A more realist answer, from my pointless of view is, sitting in an office somewhere away from the harsh realities of the field. Hence the name field engineer.
I'm sure there are good engineers out there, somewhere, maybe, but, if you want to find them, you need to look for them in their natural habitat, the field. Not in an office, although you will find them there. Not in a boardroom, though, they do make an appearance here too. The best place to find them is in the field, the better one's are harder to find because they are deep in their fields. You know, like a field engineer. They're probably a little dirtier, sweatier, and better positioned to discuss, argue, or approve a concept since they are knee-deep in it. Those fancy, ivory tower, I've got all the books, types; look good, and maybe can hold their own, yeah they're out there too. But for my money, I would look for the good, old, hard to find, field engineer.

Arizona (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year ago | (#44665095)

Yeah well, they are not taking into account this concentration of rocket scientists in Arizona [youtube.com] .

Re:Arizona (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44667669)

Wow. Simply wow. I wonder how many them there niggas you could kill with guns that big. America: Land of the Armed Retards. How is this shit legal in a supposedly civilized country?

engineers like to live in civilization (2)

alen (225700) | about a year ago | (#44665107)

news at 11
highly educated people like to live in areas with good schools, lots of shopping and stuff to do. holy crap, unvbelievable

Re:engineers like to live in civilization (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#44665451)

The point (of the summary) is they don't like it more than anyone else.

Re:engineers like to live in civilization (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666229)

You believe Houston is noted for its good schools?
Noting Rice (highly ranked-but small) and the University of Houston
(ranked low internationally-but big), Houston has rather few universitities
for its size.

Re:engineers like to live in civilization (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666457)

OP meant primary and secondary schools for their kids. Nobody moves to live near a university unless they're a professor, student, or sexual predator (not that those are mutually exclusive).

What about Africa? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665159)

Where do all the resident geniuses in Africa 'cluster'?

Re:What about Africa? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665367)

South Africa and Egypt, since those place have the most white people.

my buddy's (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44665163)

my buddy's step-sister makes $79 an hour on the laptop. She has been unemployed for 5 months but last month her payment was $17266 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Here's the site to read more buzz90.com

Visualising concentration (1)

nmoore (22729) | about a year ago | (#44665301)

Here's a choropleth map [choropleth.us] based on the first table. Unfortunately the map generator doesn't seem to handle non-integers, so "1" really means "1.0 to 1.999" and so on.

where the jobs are (4, Insightful)

confused one (671304) | about a year ago | (#44665341)

Engineers cluster where the jobs are. So do most people. We're sort of past the question, which came first, the population or the jobs? Businesses build where they can acquire (1)people (2)space (3)economic benefits (4)access to transportation for goods. That describes most of the urban population centers (although #2 might require building in the suburbs).

Re:where the jobs are (5, Interesting)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44665491)

Businesses build where they can acquire (1)people (2)space (3)economic benefits (4)access to transportation for goods.

You forgot #5: happenstance. The best explanation for why Silicon Valley is where it is, is that Bill Shockley's mother lived there. He could have started Shockley Semiconductor Laboratories almost anywhere he wanted, and either New Jersey or SoCal would have made more sense. Seattle became a big tech hub because Gates and Allen were from there, and they missed home more than they liked New Mexico.

Re:where the jobs are (3, Insightful)

confused one (671304) | about a year ago | (#44665705)

fair enough. I can't argue with that; although, there have been a number of analysis done which showed that without the support of people who happened to be living in the San Francisco bay area, and the liberal support of the University of California system, Silicon Valley could not have happened. Attempts to replicate it have failed due to a lack of the right people or lack of economic support.

Re:where the jobs are (1)

ub3r n3u7r4l1st (1388939) | about a year ago | (#44666217)

Also the weather and demographics (especially crime rate) matters. The University of Illinois system, along with leading businesses in the region and nationwide, trying to recreate another "Silicon Valley" in the Chicago area, but to no avail. You get the money, you get the infrastructure, you get the people, people rather go elsewhere.

Re:where the jobs are (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44669579)

As someone from Chicago, I can concur with this. The best schools in the state are Northwestern, UoChicago, and UoIllinois Urbana. UoC could arguably be the best school we have but is in the middle of the south side ghetto. UoI is in the middle of state and nothing but farm fields. NW is on the north side of the city and tends to feed Abbott and UOP and such, but nothing of a STEM cluster that pulls people in. And Chicago is as liberal if not more that SF.

Re:where the jobs are (2)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44666267)

there have been a number of analysis done which showed that without the support of people who happened to be living in the San Francisco bay area, and the liberal support of the University of California system, Silicon Valley could not have happened

That's probably true, but there was nothing unique about the bay area when SV got started. Many other places had/have good universities, and most of the people who started SV weren't even from that area. The "gang of eight", for example, were all people who moved there because they got jobs at Shockley Semiconductor Laboratories.

Attempts to replicate it have failed due to a lack of the right people or lack of economic support.

Or because Shockley and his mom are dead. It was really the IC that made SV, and inventions like that don't come along very often.

Re:where the jobs are (2)

Princeofcups (150855) | about a year ago | (#44667763)

fair enough. I can't argue with that; although, there have been a number of analysis done which showed that without the support of people who happened to be living in the San Francisco bay area, and the liberal support of the University of California system, Silicon Valley could not have happened. Attempts to replicate it have failed due to a lack of the right people or lack of economic support.

It's a mostly forgotten fact that the Sun in Sun Microsystems was from Stanford University Network.

Obligatory Paul Graham reference (2)

Garabito (720521) | about a year ago | (#44679535)

Paul Graham wrote an essay about trying to replicate Sillicon Valley elsewhere.

http://www.paulgraham.com/siliconvalley.html [paulgraham.com]

For Graham, it's mainly about two things: nerds (that create tech startups) and rich people (that invest in said startups):

"I think you only need two kinds of people to create a technology hub: rich people and nerds. They're the limiting reagents in the reaction that produces startups, because they're the only ones present when startups get started. Everyone else will move.

Observation bears this out: within the US, towns have become startup hubs if and only if they have both rich people and nerds. Few startups happen in Miami, for example, because although it's full of rich people, it has few nerds. It's not the kind of place nerds like.

Whereas Pittsburgh has the opposite problem: plenty of nerds, but no rich people. The top US Computer Science departments are said to be MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, and Carnegie-Mellon. MIT yielded Route 128. Stanford and Berkeley yielded Silicon Valley. But Carnegie-Mellon? The record skips at that point. Lower down the list, the University of Washington yielded a high-tech community in Seattle, and the University of Texas at Austin yielded one in Austin. But what happened in Pittsburgh? And in Ithaca, home of Cornell, which is also high on the list?"

Re:where the jobs are (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44668177)

Looking at the East Coast, I'd say defense industry pork plays a role. Particularly around Washington D.C. and those states with important Naval shipyards.

Elsewhere, it seems natural resources. Particularly the states with low overall population density such as Alaska. Things like keeping pipelines running, or stuff like nature/wildlife management.

And further down the list is likely happenstance to where a few major industries got their start. Auto industry in regards to Michigan, or software development being big in Washington.

However if starting out or expanding some businesses, the lighter states might be interesting because cost of living and real estate may be damn cheap. People can always be brought in, particularly if income vs. expenses looks good and a location doesn't have too much bad stuff (crime/pollution) going against it.

No No! - wrong way around! (5, Funny)

crepe-boy (950569) | about a year ago | (#44665401)

The obvious conclusion is that people tend to cluster around scientists and engineers - they follow us wherever we go. Fear our Pied Piper powers!

Re:No No! - wrong way around! (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#44665543)

If they're not nice to us, we could lead everyone over a cliff. Errr, who goes first in that scenario?

Re:No No! - wrong way around! (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | about a year ago | (#44665639)

The scientist/engineer with a jet pack.

More useful data for us. (1)

Bleek II (878455) | about a year ago | (#44665769)

I've made a table which shows (S&E population percent)/(U.S. population percent)! This is more useful because it shows density of S&E workers in a state population. PDF: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B1W_IMAeewo2bVZMYmFkMUN0OTA/edit?usp=sharing [google.com]

Re:More useful data for us. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666505)

The numbers for D.C., Maryland, and Virginia are skewed because of the federal government and federal contractors. It's actually rather sickening, except for perhaps the NIH. Not simply because of government largesse--that helped bootstrap Silicon Valley, too--but because at this point military contractors simply locate everybody around D.C. so they can wine & dine politicians and military leaders 24/7. And, yes, I lived and worked for years in D.C. and NOVA. You can rationalize all you want, but 25 years ago--when all the same schools and demographics existed--it was a fraction of the size. The D.C. metro area exists purely for political lobbying at this point, even the STEMS companies.

Colorado is pretty interesting, but I wonder if that's related to the military as well.

Statistics are pretty (2)

sgt scrub (869860) | about a year ago | (#44665823)

100% of all Scientists and engineers in the U.S. live in the U.S. On a serious note, I thought S&E jobs were located close to the fairchildren [wikipedia.org] and military industrial complex.

I can't believe the NSF paid for this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666051)

>> Most states had a lower S&E employment intensity than the United States as a whole (table 1).

Just wait until they do a study and find out that half of people in the USA are below average intelligence.

We here in the good ol' US of A clearly have too much of other people's money to spend...

Interactive map (4, Informative)

webplay (903555) | about a year ago | (#44666061)

Here is an interactive map showing where computer and mathematical occupations are overrepresented [city-data.com] .

Re:Interactive map (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44668163)

Excellent link! That has some crazy resolution of detail.

Census data? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44668181)

I wouldn't be surprised if it came from census data filed by zip-code, which would probably explain the detail.

Re:Interactive map (1)

MalleusEBHC (597600) | about a year ago | (#44669869)

Fantastic link. That's much more useful than TFA.

Zooming down from a national view to the valley is a perfect example of how that map is useful. CA as a whole shows up as about average nationally. Zoom in a little, and Santa Clara County is a bright spot pulling most of the weight for the whole state. Zoom in further, and you can identify the tech mini-corridors like the Sunnyvale/Cupertino/Mountain View triangle (software-heavy), the North 1st Street chunk (hardware heavy), and SOMA (the app-development heavy pit where VC money goes to die). ;)

Put it in an infographic (1)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about a year ago | (#44666239)

Ain't nobody got time to read stats.

Re:Put it in an infographic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44666613)

Ain't nobody got time to read stats.

Ahh, but soon you will have all the time in the world, courtesy
of your unemployment which is due to your illiteracy.

Federal Funding (2)

Jeff1946 (944062) | about a year ago | (#44666699)

Federal R&D funding agencies often have to justify why certain states get a disproportional amount of their funding. Information like this can be used to show why some states get a lot more federal funding than others. About 20 years ago I looked at DOD basic research funding per capita. As I recall Mass. got about $50 per person vs. 50 cents for Maine. NSF has a program called EPSCOR to set aside funding just for the have not states.

states too big a measure (1)

ILongForDarkness (1134931) | about a year ago | (#44667295)

California might have the average number of engineers but that doesn't mean there aren't a lot of them concentrated in the bay area. People concentrate for resource reasons being able to hire or change jobs, being able to locate funding etc. A state the size of California (especially surrounded by low population states) are too big to look at as a whole. You need to be within commuting distance for network affects to be of any use. This is the equivalent of stating that the country side in the 19th century was equally populated with fabric mills even though that clearly wouldn't be the case since they were using water wheels on rivers for power. Zoom out far enough and everyone is average.

more people = more people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44667365)

So states with more people have more people employed in certain industries? WOW!!!!

Justifying the funds in Engineering RnD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44698615)

Yeah i agree with jeff. Federal RnD funding agencies are responsible for real distribution of funds to all states. This is what Voice of Engineers [voiceofengineers.com] demands from the state.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?