Comment author: RyanCarey 11 February 2017 07:56:16PM *  5 points [-]

Great to see this!

My 2c on what research I and others like me would find useful from groups like this:

  • Overviewing empirical and planning-relevant considerations (rather than philosophical theorizing).
  • Focusing on obstacles and major events on the path to "technological maturity" I.e. risky or transformative techs.
  • Investigate specific risky and transformative tech in detail. FHI has done a little of this but it is very neglected on the margin. Scanning microscopy for neural tissue, invasive brain-computer interfaces, surveillance, brain imaging for mind-reading, CRISPR, genome synthesis, GWAS studies in areas of psychology, etc.
  • Help us understand AI progress. AI Impacts has done a bit of this but they are tiny. It would be really useful to have a solid understanding of growth of capabilities, funding and academic resources in a field like deep learning. How big is the current bubble compared to previous ones, et cetera.

Also, in its last year, GPP largely specialized on tech and long-run issues. This meant it did a higher density of work on prioritization questions that mattered. Prima facie, this and other reasons would also make Oxford Prioritization Project want to specialize on the same.

Lastly, you'll get more views and comments if you use a (more beautiful) Medum blog.

Happy to justify these positions further.

Good luck!

Comment author: ThomasSittler 11 March 2017 10:51:07AM 0 points [-]

Hey Ryan, I'm following up about the idea of using a Medium blog. Medium is beautiful, and allows commenting on particular portion of the document, which is the main advantage of Google Docs commenting. However, you need to create an account to comment, and it seems like that will be too much trouble for most people. Also, it seems like there isn't a simple way to embed Medium into Squarespace (https://support.squarespace.com/hc/en-us/articles/205814558-Connecting-Medium-with-Squarespace). What are your thoughts?

Comment author: ThomasSittler 11 March 2017 10:40:23AM 4 points [-]

I think I've only ever seen cause-neutrality used to mean cause-impartiality.

Comment author: Peter_Hurford  (EA Profile) 16 February 2017 04:40:45AM 0 points [-]

What's the time period?

One additional reason why I ask is that it seems like a lot of OxPri (do you have a preferred abbreviation? OPP is naughty and conflicts with OpenPhil) research to date has been of the form "field X looks interesting and may have some promising opportunities but it doesn't look like we could do anything for 10K GBP" which makes it feel like the donation size may be limiting.

Comment author: ThomasSittler 16 February 2017 12:30:57PM *  1 point [-]

Hey Peter. Thanks for your interest! We're using oxprio.

Quoting from our homepage: "The Project is funded with a grant from the Centre for Effective Altruism. It will begin in the 1st week of Hilary term 2017 (January 15) and will end at the deadline for reaching a decision, in the 2nd week of Trinity term 2017 (May 6). After we reach our decision, the £10,000 will be disbursed to our chosen recipient. The funding is not restricted to a pre-selected set of charities."

In my view, "doesn't look like we could do anything for £10,000" arguments are in part fallacious (http://effective-altruism.com/ea/17b/oxford_prioritisation_project_another_brick_in/) searches for lego bricks. In some cases we've encountered (like funding research into effective mental health interventions (https://oxpr.io/blog/2017/2/10/lovisa-tengberg-mental-health-an-update) donation size does appear limiting.

Comment author: Peter_Hurford  (EA Profile) 14 February 2017 12:01:20AM 4 points [-]

I think others have suggested this, but have you thought about putting your 10K GBP into a donor lottery or otherwise saving up to getting a larger donation size? I'd like to see research address that question (e.g., is a 100K donation >10x better than a 10K donation?).

Comment author: ThomasSittler 15 February 2017 09:52:32PM 1 point [-]

There are some pragmatic obstacles to that. For instance, team members have only signed up to work on the Oxford Prioritisation Project over a particular time period. If we ended up winning the donor lottery later on, we'd have to do lots of research then.

Comment author: Peter_Hurford  (EA Profile) 15 February 2017 09:39:46PM 1 point [-]

Would it make sense to donate to the LJAF for promoting open science?

Comment author: ThomasSittler 15 February 2017 09:49:59PM 3 points [-]

Only 12% of their grants are in this area: http://www.arnoldfoundation.org/grants/#

Comment author: ThomasSittler 15 February 2017 03:43:20PM *  1 point [-]

I am aware that the formatting is poor, but the EA forum text editor is hard to deal with. Tips on how to improve would be appreciated.

Right now the best way to read Daniel's post is probably the Google Doc:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/13wsMAugRacu52EPZo6-7NJh4QuYayKyIbjChwU0KsVU/edit#

13

Daniel May: "Open Science: little room for more funding"

Cross- posted to the Oxford Prioritisation Project blog. Read and comment on the Google Document version of this post here . Feedback from the EA community is how we improve. Summary I consider open science as a cause area, by reviewing Open Phil’s published work, as well as some popular... Read More
4

Should the Oxford Prioritisation Project look for lego bricks?

I'll regularly be cross-posting things from the  Oxford Prioritisation Project blog  to the EA forum. This serves partly as a commitment mechanism for us, whereby we would be embarrassed if we stopped posting. More importantly, we value the EA community's feedback on what we are doing. If you point out mistakes... Read More
4

Laurie Pycroft: "CRISPR biorisk as an Oxford Prioritisation Project topic"

I'll regularly be cross-posting things from the Oxford Prioritisation Project blog to the EA forum. This serves partly as a commitment mechanism for us, whereby we would be embarrassed if we stopped posting. More importantly, we value the EA community's feedback on what we are doing. If you point out mistakes... Read More
9

Introducing the Oxford Prioritisation Project blog

Cross-posted here . The Oxford Prioritisation Project is a new research group in the effective altruism community. The Project’s goal is to allocate £10,000 to an organisation that accepts donations, in the way that will have the greatest positive impact. As a team , we are conducting in-depth research on... Read More

View more: Prev | Next