Abi Olvera's Golden rice delay dashboard, includes BOTEC calculations and sources, supplement to her Substack article A blocked GMO rice could have saved 100,000 children. The same tech makes pineapples pink:

The World Cup is a random number generator. And at the end legends be minted. From The 1001, an EA sports blog.

Re the grand “does individual giving/etg still matter post Anthropic IPO” question: I think it pushes towards individuals acting more like grantmakers themselves. Anthropic billionaires don’t know about your Twitter follower who could do something great with $1k and they aren’t gonna have the capacity to find out, but you do!  There are just a lot of freedoms one has as an individual donor who isn’t a public figure: You… * Don’t have to justify yourself on the EA Forum to friends and colleagues for something illegible * Know about lots of random things that others don’t, like which of your friends you trust to do a good job at X Y or Z * Don’t have to worry about smear campaigns or hostile journalists bc nobody is going to know or care how you spent $2k * Can own whatever reputational stuff there is if you want to (or not, your call) * Probably don’t have to worry about the community-level effects of some policy unless you’re giving away say at least 6 figures/year and probably more like 7 * Can set arbitrary terms and conditions like “here’s a bounty that I’ll pay out at my own discretion” * Don’t have to worry about giving some project or other entity any sort of reputation * Regrant to your trusted friend who finds micro-granting fun and interesting * Probably can do other cool things I’m not thinking of rn Also: the same dynamic between Anthropic ~billionaires and folks reading this as a group also holds within that latter group: there are diminishing returns even at low margins so Jane Street should look a little less good than it used to (still pretty good tbc) and “having a couple thousand bucks around and being on the lookout for one-off opportunities” should seem a bit better than it used to. 

The Future of Life Institute Endorses Avoiding the Creation of Digital Minds In §4 "Human Agency and Liberty" of FLI's Pro-Human AI Declaration, the principle "No AI Personhood" states: "AI systems must not be granted legal personhood, and AI systems should not be designed such that they deserve personhood." (emphasis added) The second part suggests that we should actively avoid designing sentient AIs. After all, if they were sentient, then they would deserve personhood. To preclude the latter, bar the former. The likely reason: liability evasion. A companion principle reads: "AI must not be able to act as a liability shield, preventing those deploying it from being legally responsible for their actions." Personhood is an upstream fix: no personhood means there is no entity, other than existing companies, to absorb responsibility.  The contending reason: avoiding power concentration. The broader framing ("Human Agency and Liberty") suggests that AI legal status could concentrate power and dilute human rights protections. I can't be sure these are FLI's reasons. The conference was closed; deliberations are not public. But all this to say, if these are FLI's reasons, then both reasons are premature.  Both concerns can be addressed by placing AIs within legal structures that make them accountable under existing liability and antitrust frameworks, like A-corps. Using personhood is, at best, a sledgehammer for a nail. At its worst, it's a red herring, and companies are trying to deflect the focus of their responsibility onto prejudices about codifying AI sentience. A better reason for banning the creation of artificial sentience would be analogous to restricting DNA research, human cloning, or genome editing. In all cases, the process entails parties who cannot represent themselves, competitive pressure if one party takes unilateral action, and irreversibility in cases of large-scale deployment. That said, I think that decision should come from international conve

A lot of people have criticized our planet's sole trillionaire as not humanitarian enough. But the truth is that Musk has done more for malaria than any man alive. Thanks to his work at USAID, nearly a quintillion more Plasmodiums are alive today!