Comment author: casebash 23 February 2018 03:35:54AM 2 points [-]

Out of curiosity, how many local groups already have paid organisers and how do you think this compares with an additional employee at a non-local EA org?

Comment author: casebash 15 February 2018 10:56:06PM *  0 points [-]

One of the biggest challenges is trying to even figure out how likely it is caused by something physical vs. a psychological root cause. It is a very controversial topic, to say the least. I spent about an hour looking into this, but I wasn't really able to get anywhere, at least without any knowledge of the field or where to find reliable information.

Comment author: RandomEA 04 February 2018 10:20:12PM 1 point [-]

You missed one key consideration. It could also redirect money from more efficient overseas charities to less efficient US charities and even if this was a small amount, it may still be net negative if the utility difference was large enough.

I believe this is number 2 under "Costs (if successful)."

Comment author: casebash 04 February 2018 10:23:25PM 0 points [-]

You're right. Edited my comment to note that this was actually addressed.

Comment author: casebash 04 February 2018 10:11:18PM *  2 points [-]

I suspect that this would be a net good. We need to move more people towards cost effectiveness and this involves meetings people where they are. If this succeeded in creating a large group of people who were somewhat closer to the EA perspective, then EA might have a significantly easier time bringing in more members. And I suspect that this might be more than enough to counter-balance any people who change from donating to the most effective globally to the most effective locally.

(EDIT: The commenter below is right that this was addressed and I missed it): You missed one key consideration. It could also redirect money from more efficient overseas charities to less efficient US charities and even if this was a small amount, it may still be net negative if the utility difference was large enough.

Comment author: casebash 02 February 2018 10:33:14PM *  2 points [-]

"What is the best way to get more people to act upon the principles of effective altruism?" - I'd suggest looking at what the bottleneck is. Are you getting lots of people coming to your meetups and then not coming back or is it mostly just the regular with very few new members? Importantly, if a group has a low retention rate, they probably don't want to scale reach as they'd just burning through people who might have become members if they'd been better placed to capture them. Anyway, from what I've heard mass media outreach doesn't really seem to have been effective for EA groups and that matches what I've seen in Australia too where I haven't heard of a single person who first heard of Effective Altruism through mass media, while in contrast, I've met several who heard of us through more niche channels like podcasts.

Anyway, I'm hugely in favour of EA Sweden exploring politics as it really does seem to be a comparative advantage for the reasons given. EA is much more likely to be able to influence politics in smaller countries where you have more chance of getting a meeting with important people and there are a lot of advantages of exploring working in politics when any fallout might be contained.

Comment author: RomeoStevens 29 January 2018 08:55:44PM *  7 points [-]

This is a big part of why I find the 'EA is talent constrained not funding constrained' meme to be a bit silly. The obvious counter is to spend money learning how to convert money into talent. I haven't heard of anyone focusing on this problem as a core area, but if it's an ongoing bottleneck then it 'should' be scoring high on effective actions.

There is a lot of outside view research on this that could be collected and analyzed.

Comment author: casebash 29 January 2018 11:58:09PM *  1 point [-]

Even if we had funds, the problem of who to fund is a hard one and perhaps it would be better spent simply hiring more staff for EA orgs? The best way to know that you can trust someone is to know them personally, but distributing funds in that manner creates concerns about favouritism, ect.

Comment author: casebash 25 January 2018 01:28:09AM 1 point [-]

Sadly, EA negatively selects against do-ers, because do-ers need opportunities to make a direct difference. There are plenty of opportunities to do things within meta-EA, but people need to buy into EA before they want to work on meta-EA, so we need some more immediate volunteering opportunities to bridge the gap. I do like the Self-Care, Direct Impact, Career Capital and Personal Fit breakdown, although I'd probably split motivation off into a seperate category, as some volunteering opportunities can motivate you more to give to charity or to work to make a difference in the world.

Comment author: casebash 22 January 2018 03:02:09AM 0 points [-]

Anyone want to volunteer to list the most promising one's for those of us who don't want to read the whole list?

Comment author: casebash 11 January 2018 08:41:36AM 1 point [-]

I'd also add: Get a group of people together. Easiest way is to create a Facebook Group and promote it. Getting a new cause into EA is a huge amount of work and so you don't want to try to do it single handed.

Comment author: casebash 03 January 2018 11:46:56PM *  5 points [-]

I also feel that EA hub is outdated. Firstly, I'm not a fan of the green design - I suspect that a more modern design would add credibility to the whole enterprise. Secondly, the interface isn't particularly well designed. I think it might be better if there was just one point for the people in each city and clicking there showed you all the names. Lastly, it seems like it would be nice if you could get notifications when a new person is found near you and if people to opt-in to receive messages from other EAs. If done well, we might make it significantly easier for new EA groups to get off the ground.

I also think that the difficulty in finding actions to take is very concerning. EA needs more do-ers than thinkers, but right now, we have a negative selection against do-ers because there are plenty of interesting ideas to think about, but much less clear actions to take.

View more: Prev | Next