Comment author: MichaelPlant 16 February 2016 01:18:23PM 2 points [-]

Nice post. Can I suggest you're missing the most obvious one from your test?

How about "making people happier"?

which you could rephrase as

"reducing suffering/connecting people/empowering people to life the lives they want."

I'm one of those (controversial?) people who thinks most economic and technological development is morally neutral and does surprisingly little to make people's lives better, largely because people adapt to it and doesn't make a difference over the long run. I'm actually planning to make this argument in a longer post soon as I also think it's something of a neglected issue.

Comment author: Ilya 17 February 2016 10:36:51PM 0 points [-]

To me development of category "reducing suffering/connecting" is the most interesting and meaningful as a seed from which everything optimally (effectively) grows. I wish to see at least 1 out of 100 intellectuals to ask question about hierarchy of life purpose and meaning, and then what makes their life effective relatively to life purpose.

Comment author: Gleb_T  (EA Profile) 12 January 2016 09:00:01PM 1 point [-]

This sounds like a good project, but I'm curious why start an independent venture and not simply approach 80000 hours and suggest to them this area as a subproject of their work? Is there any specific importance to building a separate brand/organization?

Comment author: Ilya 17 February 2016 10:21:02PM 0 points [-]

80000 is overloaded with its own burdens and does not have optimal resourcefulness to effectively develop a new practical large-scale initiative. Announcing the Good Technology Project has to grow as a new grassroot movement and organization.

Comment author: Ilya 17 February 2016 10:12:35PM 0 points [-]

I am very happy to see Announcing the Good Technology Project exploring its mission. This is very unique what you are trying to advance. I am 100% supporting.

Comment author: Ilya 29 November 2014 04:21:10AM *  1 point [-]

Chris and Patrick have made the Podcast via radio a valuable economical resource to communicate and learn without visual component, thus enabling blind or low-vision people to learn and share the EA experiences, and also via low-speed internet .

Comment author: UriKatz  (EA Profile) 01 November 2014 08:42:35PM *  2 points [-]

Thank you for your offer to help me further, but having reviewed the link posted by Vincent, I am certain I do not have the time to start a local chapter right now.

Comment author: Ilya 08 November 2014 07:15:50PM 0 points [-]

I did not offer you to start a local chapter.

Comment author: Vincent_deB 29 October 2014 08:55:23AM 2 points [-]

Do you know of any work that has been done comparing the effectiveness of outreach to other activities effective altruism supporters can take? I refer specifically to the limited kind of outreach suggested here, such as opening a local chapter, and not the kind of outreach Peter Singer is capable of.

Perhaps weeatquince could ask someone from The High Impact Network to comment?

Comment author: Ilya 30 October 2014 06:31:14PM 0 points [-]

Vincent, thank you referencing The High Impact Network, which stimulated my further comment to Uri, and an opportunity to meet Brooklyn members of THINK.

Comment author: UriKatz  (EA Profile) 29 October 2014 07:15:29AM *  1 point [-]

Hi Ilya, thanks for your reply. I may have misunderstood you, but your example seems not to take into account the overhead of managing a larger team, or the diminishing returns of each additional staff member. This goes to the heart of my question: what would be the most effective way for each individual to further EA causes? Should they work full time and donate more, or work part time and do other things (this question may only apply to those who are earning to give). This question can best be determined on a case by case basis of course. It relates to the current article, because I was wondering if anyone tried to analyze the potential returns of localized outreach. I can compare such an analysis to the estimates I have of my startup's risks and rewards. These are numbers I prefer not to mention, mainly because they are highly speculative.

Comment author: Ilya 30 October 2014 05:24:40PM *  1 point [-]

Hi Uri, I guess there is no modern (21st century) data yet on potential return of localized outreach because the Oxford-style EA mentality is very young, though the great minds thousand years ago have found the best answers to the challenge of best purpose/meaning of human life. My intuition tells me that the most effective way to actualize EA causes would be through creation of small teams/groups/collectives able of sustainable economical and ideological exchange with the environment. My assumption is that members of such a group recognize their need for harmonious interconnection. Think of a living organism in which all organs work in unity and harmony. A more or less normal organism does not have what you call “management overhead”. Complexity of physical human body, with all its “major and minor” organs, comprised of hundreds of millions of cells, is much greater than complexity of a small (3 to10 person) team. If you are interested and free in principle of forming a small project team for sustainable propagation, I’d like to chat with you in skype.

Comment author: UriKatz  (EA Profile) 28 October 2014 10:26:06AM 3 points [-]

Thank you for this very important post, this is something I have been wanting to do for a very long time.

Do you know of any work that has been done comparing the effectiveness of outreach to other activities effective altruism supporters can take? I refer specifically to the limited kind of outreach suggested here, such as opening a local chapter, and not the kind of outreach Peter Singer is capable of.

I will give you an example of what I am thinking about.

A year ago I changed my career plan and started a technology startup. If my startup succeeds, it will substantially increase the amount I am able to give throughout my life. I expect work on an outreach program to require significant time and effort which I do not have to spare, so it will slow down my startup's progress, and decrease its chances of success. Assuming after 1 year I get 10 people to take GWWC's pledge, which I consider phenomenal success, my guesstimates show the expected dollars given to charity will be more or less the same. I am aware of the concept of flow through effects, and the tiny probability that I convince the next billionaire to join the cause, but I do not know how to add that to my calculation at this time.

Any reference or help will be much appreciated.

Comment author: Ilya 29 October 2014 03:34:22AM *  -1 points [-]

Uri, it is my understanding that a better EA model of a startup would be a collective one, than individualistic. Your business will grow faster by creating and growing a larger team. For example, if your current team needs 12 month of full time work to complete the startup phase, then by increasing the team 3 times, the work may be accomplished in 3 month.
I am interested to learn nature of your startup for more qualified communications with you.

Comment author: Ilya 25 October 2014 03:53:58PM *  1 point [-]

Michelle, my great respect for work you and your organization are doing.

I am not a native English speaker, and it will take me long time to get 10 karmas, unless members of this forum accelerate me.

I am not a member of GWWC. Not Yet. I even did not know 3 weeks ago that EA-minded organizations exist. My remarks to you this post are as follows:

  1. “to improve the lives of others” sounds better to me than ” to help people in developing countries”.

  2. “Pledge” sounds heavy loaded of many meanings, confusing people and potential donors. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pledge Words like anticipate, intend, expect coordinates with more people.

  3. By locking people into giving 10% or more of what they earn, you lock out people who may be willing to give less than 10%; and do not include people who may want to donate wealth they have not earned but inherited.

  4. Phrase “I make this pledge freely, openly, and sincerely.” is a kind of artificial or antiquated or redundant. People volunteer to donate, so there is no point to impose pledges, unless you wish to have an elitist club, which has merits.

A version of improved text becomes more democratic, readable, and friendlier.

“I recognize that I can use part of my income to do a significant amount of good. Since I can live well enough on a smaller income, I anticipate that for the rest of my life or until the day I retire, I shall give percentage of what I earn, or whatever I can, to whichever organizations can most effectively use it to improve the lives of others, now and in the years to come.”

Comment author: Evan_Gaensbauer 21 October 2014 05:38:10AM 0 points [-]

Yeah, okay. Send me a private message about it, and we can discuss what either of us have in mind.

Comment author: Ilya 24 October 2014 08:37:49PM 1 point [-]

I sent 2 days ago a private message to your mail box at this forum. Did you receive it?

View more: Next