Alternative career paths could include things like government policy roles that have say a tenth of the impact of a global hub EA policy role but still are the highest impact opportunities available

I'm not sure policy effectiveness works like this. Perhaps AI policy is particularly concentrated where AI innovation is happening, but I would have thought e.g. animal welfare policy is pretty global, and while bigger markets have more impact, they correspondingly have less tractability / more competition, so the smaller market may be easier to find success in. It's even more complicated than that when you realise that policies can be modelled on success in other countries, so positive change in Australia could be a useful resource for the global effort.

not sure if such a study would naturally also be helpful to potential attackers, perhaps even more helpful to attackers than defenders, so might need to be careful about whether / how you disseminate the information

"earning to receive"

(I think this is Habiba's joke)

On the other hand, the project also spent some significant amount of money on staffing, supplying, maintaining and improving the property, so total expenditure is surely more than just purchase price minus sale price.

I feel a bit worried that everyone would like to believe that EAs will receive criticism in good faith, so they will be excited to tell you this is true, even if they can't really be that confident. I hope they're right, but worry they're really saying "I, personally, would receive this in good faith, and I think others ought to, and I don't see why they wouldn't" or something like that.

I would guess from things like the Bostrom email controversy that you'll get at least a couple of frustrating comments, and perhaps a small handful people who will be reflexively and unfairly judgemental. I would hope and guess that these experiences will be outweighed by people being grateful for you raising your concerns, including from people who ultimately disagree with the concerns. But obviously it's hard to be sure (even harder given that I don't know what the concerns are).

I'm a bit worried this comment raises the barrier to commentary, so let me try to lower it by saying you can feel free to DM me if you think talking to me privately about your post will help you get it published :)

[[Personal information removed by moderators]]

Do you know who it is? If so, do you intend for readers to be able to figure it out based on what you've said? If so, why not just name them? Can you say how you traced them?

I guess it depends what you mean by taking seriously. I would say Émile is (correctly) not being taken seriously in the sense of expecting their criticisms to have merit?

Do you see EAs taking Émile seriously? Émile is banned from the forum, and I would guess most people who know the name at all know it as the name of someone who has been persistently unreasonable in their criticisms.

(btw though, your comment says "he didn't be taken seriously", but Émile is a they, not a he)

Dustin Moskovitz claims "Tesla has committed consumer fraud on a massive scale", and "people are going to jail at the end"

https://www.threads.net/@moskov/post/C6KW_Odvky0/

Not super EA relevant, but I guess relevant inasmuch as Moskovitz funds us and Musk has in the past too. I think if this were just some random commentator I wouldn't take it seriously at all, but a bit more inclined to believe Dustin will take some concrete action. Not sure I've read everything he's said about it, I'm not used to how Threads works

Forum post saying the same thing, with some discussion: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/SM3YzTsXmQ6BaFcsL/you-probably-want-to-donate-any-manifold-currency-this-week