<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.networkworld.com/community" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>basic research</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/8700</link>
 <description>Showing new posts in a forum view</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Nature: Bad news for Bell Labs</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/31702</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The journal &lt;em&gt;Nature &lt;/em&gt;has a story titled &amp;quot;Bell Labs bottoms out&amp;quot; that laments the end of basic research at the storied tech factory that has earned numerous Nobel Prizes for its work. The story, &lt;a href=&quot;/community/It generated six Nobel prizes in as many decades, but after a string of staff departures, physicists claim that the once iconic Bell Laboratories has finally pulled out of basic science.  Just four scientists are left working in Bell&#039;s fundamental physics department in Murray Hill, New Jersey, Nature has learned.&quot;&gt;which you need to register on the Nature site to access in full&lt;/a&gt;, says that only four scientists are left in &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.alcatel-lucent.com/wps/portal/BellLabs&quot;&gt;Bell Labs&lt;/a&gt;&amp;#39; fundamental physics group.  &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/31702&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/31702#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/8700">basic research</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/9600">Bell Labs</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:10:45 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Alpha Doggs</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">31702 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Assessing the U.S. research picture</title>
 <link>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/24033</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The National Science Board has released its 2008 Science and Engineering Indicators report and it looks like the U.S. has some work to do.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;According to a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cra.org/govaffairs/blog/archives/000648.html&quot;&gt;Computing Research Policy Blog review&lt;/a&gt;  of the report,  Asia is drawing away science and engineeering activities from the U.S., the feds are leaving two thirds of U.S. R&amp;amp;D funding to industry and 40% of the public thinks there is not enough federal funding of basic research. On the bright side, most foreign-born Ph.D. candidates in the U.S. plan to stay here and the U.S. is maintaining its share of high tech manufacturing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The board made three broad recommendations:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;* The feds need to step up their level of funding for basic research &lt;span class=&#039;read-more&#039;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/24033&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Read more&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <comments>http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/24033#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/8700">basic research</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/8699">National Science Board</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/4398">NSF</category>
 <category domain="http://www.networkworld.com/community/taxonomy/term/1257">R&amp;amp;D</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:27:37 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Alpha Doggs</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">24033 at http://www.networkworld.com/community</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
