Comments
More from the author
Curated and popular this week
66
TL;DR
* GOAL 3 is a social enterprise that created IMPALA, a patient monitoring and digital platform system for low-resource settings. There is also a GOAL 3 foundation that raises funds to ensure underserved communities will be reached.
* A recently completed report from Rethink Priorities calculated IMPALA to have a cost per DALY averted of $7–17 in paediatr...
This month effective altruism has gotten lots of attention, including a cover story in The Economist. It feels pretty surreal to be on the receiving end of it. But I feel grateful these ideas have caught on, and even more grateful for the drive, earnestness, and compassion of so many people who took strange but well-argued ideas seriously and then actually acted on them....
Note: This post was crossposted from the Coefficient Giving Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post.
Subtitle: On vegan advocacy, effective altruism, and FIFA
I turn 40 today. Here are some hot takes.
On factory farming
1. Our biggest challenge is salience. If factory farming led the evening news, it wouldn’t last lo...
Recent opportunities to take action
I find it disappointing they reference nuclear winter without qualifying that it is quite unlikely given today's arsenals. I would reccomend against sharing it in it's current state.
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/pMsnCieusmYqGW26W/how-bad-would-nuclear-winter-caused-by-a-us-russia-nuclear
But that analysis by Luisa Rodriguez still predicts a fairly bad nuclear autumn that could kill roughly 30 to 90% of humanity.
Agreed - I do not mean to imply nuclear holocaust would not be horrible.
I do not think the FLI should cherry pick extraordinarily high numbers to make that case though, and them doing so/us sharing them doing so eats away at our epistemic commons.
I'd really rather not show that video to a well informed friend as they'd go "Wait, but I know that's wrong" and then discount other things I say about X-Risk.
Fair point. I guess the key problem is the lamentable lack of research on nuclear winter compared to other possible forms of climate change.
Google Scholar for example shows only 14,900 entries for "nuclear winter", versus 2.6 million for 'global warming', and 3 million for 'climate change'.
So, we've got roughly 375 times as much research on global warming as on nuclear winter.