[alephnerd]

> built on much flatter parts of those areas

Seattle was MADE flat by literally using fire hoses to flatten hills and mountains [0].

That said, I disagree with the role geography has with developing a tech industry - most of it can be directly related to investment put during WW2 and the 1950s into innovation clusters.

For example, Seattle and aerospace (Boeing), Bay Area and computers+electronics+nukes (HP, IBM Almaden, LLNL, LLBL, Los Alamos managed by UCB), San Diego and Biotech+Defense Tech (Salk Lab, Navy), Portland and electronics (INL, PNNL, Tektronics, Intel), etc

[0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regrading_in_Seattle

[lizknope]

I saw an interactive exhibit at Museum of History & Industry (MOHAI) in Seattle. It showed how different sections were regraded and you could push buttons where that section of hills and lakes would get lifted or dropped down. This wasn't a computer display, this was a real physical model of the city.

The Bay Area really benefits from Stanford and Berkeley being there. You need a steady stream of educated new grads to grow from.

[alephnerd]

> Museum of History & Industry

Love that museum. Paul Allen really made Seattle such a great city - amazing museums, good sports, amazing biotech research, strong entrepreneurship scene. It's like Boston but better.

> Bay Area really benefits from Stanford and Berkeley

Also UCSF (major biotech hub) and SJSU (major electronics hub - imo EE@SJSU makes EE@Stanford look like child's play).