Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by Tobias Häberli, Tilman
3 min read 0

8

AI safetyBiosecurityOpportunities to take actionGlobal catastrophic riskJob listing (open)
Frontpage

Employment Period: As soon as possible to March 2025 with an option to extend
Location: London (from mid-January to March, with relocation support available)
Employment Workload: 0.7-1 FTE, flexible 
Salary: GBP 42,000 p.a. for 1 FTE (potentially adjustable to background and experience)
Deadline: Apply by September 29th using this form

Overview

​​Pivotal Research supports promising researchers and aspiring policymakers working to reduce global catastrophic risk (GCR). For the 2025 Winter Research Fellowship, Pivotal Research is looking for multiple research managers for our main research areas: AI Governance & Policy, Technical AI Safety, and Biosecurity. This 2-month fellowship allows participants to develop their research with support from a research manager and guidance from subject matter experts. Working from a GCR-focused co-working space in London offers a collaborative environment to help fellows achieve great research output, build valuable networks, and plan their future careers. You can find more information about our fellowships in the 2024 Research Fellowship announcement - and we're happy to answer any questions by email.

About the Role

As a Research Manager, you will have a unique opportunity to contribute to GCR research and policy by supporting fellows' research and career development. Past fellows have gone on to impactful roles in their fields. You will have significant autonomy and decision-making power in shaping the fellowship, making this an excellent chance to gain research management experience.

Key Responsibilities

  • Assist with the selection of fellows during the application process.
  • Review research proposals, help refine projects, and pair fellows with great mentors.
  • Provide ongoing guidance through weekly check-ins, ensuring high-quality research outputs.
  • Support fellows’ independent growth & career plans and encourage ambitious goals.
  • Design and implement fellowship components such as resource materials, speakers series, workshops, and other events for fellows' development.

Ideal Candidate Profile

We are looking for individuals passionate about global catastrophic risk research. The ideal candidate will have significant expertise and research experience in one of our key research areas:  AI Governance & Policy, Technical AI Safety, or Biosecurity. However, we also welcome applicants from diverse backgrounds and relevant experiences, including those from outside academia.

Qualifications and Attributes

  • Knowledge or experience in AI Governance & Policy, Technical AI Safety, or Biosecurity. 
  • Ability to manage projects and help others develop and grow.
  • Strong research skills, with the ability to critically evaluate projects and communicate effectively in writing and speaking.
  • Willingness to take on responsibilities while also collaborating effectively within a diverse team.

We strongly encourage applications from individuals who are currently underrepresented in the field. We believe that a variety of perspectives enriches our work. If you're passionate about GCR research and have the relevant skills, we encourage you to apply — even if you feel you may not meet every qualification.

Location and Availability

The fellowship is planned to be in London and research managers are expected to be available in person during key periods of the program, specifically from mid-January to mid-March. Relocation support is available for candidates who are not currently based in London. Lunch and Dinner are provided at the office during the fellowship. This in-person collaboration enhances team cohesion and allows for more effective mentorship and support for our fellows. 

We welcome applicants who need visa sponsorship and are committed to supporting the right candidate in obtaining the necessary permissions to work in the UK. While we cannot guarantee sponsorship in all cases, we will do our best to assist exceptional candidates.

Working at Pivotal

At Pivotal Research, we offer a collaborative environment where all team members have significant responsibilities and flexibility to shape their roles. As part of our small, dedicated team, you'll have the opportunity to make a meaningful impact by supporting fellows in their research, career development, and networking, ultimately contributing to reducing GCR through their work. We value initiative and independent thinking, giving you the autonomy to lead your work while providing the resources and support you need to succeed.

We are committed to cultivating a diverse and inclusive workplace. We firmly believe in equality and fairness in our hiring practices and strongly encourage applicants from various backgrounds to apply. 

Application Process

Apply here

The selection process consists of three steps: first, candidates submit an application form. Next, shortlisted candidates will participate in a structured interview. Finally, there will be a short paid work test followed by an unstructured interview before final decisions are made.

For updates on the Research Fellowship application opening, express your interest here. 

We will soon open other offers for staff – if you're considering different roles at Pivotal, you can let us know here. 

You can contact us at Tilman Räuker or Tobias Häberli if you have any questions about these roles.

8

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments


No comments on this post yet.
Be the first to respond.
More from Tobias Häberli
194
Preparing Effective Altruism for an AI-Transformed World
Tobias Häberli
· · 1m read
24
24
112
UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's Speech on AI
Tobias Häberli
· · 10m read
6
6
79
[link post] How effective altruism went from a niche movement to a billion-dollar force
Tobias Häberli
· · 5m read
1
1
View more
Curated and popular this week
LintzA
 ·  · 15m read
 · 
Cross-posted to Lesswrong Introduction Several developments over the past few months should cause you to re-evaluate what you are doing. These include: 1. Updates toward short timelines 2. The Trump presidency 3. The o1 (inference-time compute scaling) paradigm 4. Deepseek 5. Stargate/AI datacenter spending 6. Increased internal deployment 7. Absence of AI x-risk/safety considerations in mainstream AI discourse Taken together, these are enough to render many existing AI governance strategies obsolete (and probably some technical safety strategies too). There's a good chance we're entering crunch time and that should absolutely affect your theory of change and what you plan to work on. In this piece I try to give a quick summary of these developments and think through the broader implications these have for AI safety. At the end of the piece I give some quick initial thoughts on how these developments affect what safety-concerned folks should be prioritizing. These are early days and I expect many of my takes will shift, look forward to discussing in the comments!  Implications of recent developments Updates toward short timelines There’s general agreement that timelines are likely to be far shorter than most expected. Both Sam Altman and Dario Amodei have recently said they expect AGI within the next 3 years. Anecdotally, nearly everyone I know or have heard of who was expecting longer timelines has updated significantly toward short timelines (<5 years). E.g. Ajeya’s median estimate is that 99% of fully-remote jobs will be automatable in roughly 6-8 years, 5+ years earlier than her 2023 estimate. On a quick look, prediction markets seem to have shifted to short timelines (e.g. Metaculus[1] & Manifold appear to have roughly 2030 median timelines to AGI, though haven’t moved dramatically in recent months). We’ve consistently seen performance on benchmarks far exceed what most predicted. Most recently, Epoch was surprised to see OpenAI’s o3 model achi
Dr Kassim
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
Hey everyone, I’ve been going through the EA Introductory Program, and I have to admit some of these ideas make sense, but others leave me with more questions than answers. I’m trying to wrap my head around certain core EA principles, and the more I think about them, the more I wonder: Am I misunderstanding, or are there blind spots in EA’s approach? I’d really love to hear what others think. Maybe you can help me clarify some of my doubts. Or maybe you share the same reservations? Let’s talk. Cause Prioritization. Does It Ignore Political and Social Reality? EA focuses on doing the most good per dollar, which makes sense in theory. But does it hold up when you apply it to real world contexts especially in countries like Uganda? Take malaria prevention. It’s a top EA cause because it’s highly cost effective $5,000 can save a life through bed nets (GiveWell, 2023). But what happens when government corruption or instability disrupts these programs? The Global Fund scandal in Uganda saw $1.6 million in malaria aid mismanaged (Global Fund Audit Report, 2016). If money isn’t reaching the people it’s meant to help, is it really the best use of resources? And what about leadership changes? Policies shift unpredictably here. A national animal welfare initiative I supported lost momentum when political priorities changed. How does EA factor in these uncertainties when prioritizing causes? It feels like EA assumes a stable world where money always achieves the intended impact. But what if that’s not the world we live in? Long termism. A Luxury When the Present Is in Crisis? I get why long termists argue that future people matter. But should we really prioritize them over people suffering today? Long termism tells us that existential risks like AI could wipe out trillions of future lives. But in Uganda, we’re losing lives now—1,500+ die from rabies annually (WHO, 2021), and 41% of children suffer from stunting due to malnutrition (UNICEF, 2022). These are preventable d
Rory Fenton
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
Cross-posted from my blog. Contrary to my carefully crafted brand as a weak nerd, I go to a local CrossFit gym a few times a week. Every year, the gym raises funds for a scholarship for teens from lower-income families to attend their summer camp program. I don’t know how many Crossfit-interested low-income teens there are in my small town, but I’ll guess there are perhaps 2 of them who would benefit from the scholarship. After all, CrossFit is pretty niche, and the town is small. Helping youngsters get swole in the Pacific Northwest is not exactly as cost-effective as preventing malaria in Malawi. But I notice I feel drawn to supporting the scholarship anyway. Every time it pops in my head I think, “My money could fully solve this problem”. The camp only costs a few hundred dollars per kid and if there are just 2 kids who need support, I could give $500 and there would no longer be teenagers in my town who want to go to a CrossFit summer camp but can’t. Thanks to me, the hero, this problem would be entirely solved. 100%. That is not how most nonprofit work feels to me. You are only ever making small dents in important problems I want to work on big problems. Global poverty. Malaria. Everyone not suddenly dying. But if I’m honest, what I really want is to solve those problems. Me, personally, solve them. This is a continued source of frustration and sadness because I absolutely cannot solve those problems. Consider what else my $500 CrossFit scholarship might do: * I want to save lives, and USAID suddenly stops giving $7 billion a year to PEPFAR. So I give $500 to the Rapid Response Fund. My donation solves 0.000001% of the problem and I feel like I have failed. * I want to solve climate change, and getting to net zero will require stopping or removing emissions of 1,500 billion tons of carbon dioxide. I give $500 to a policy nonprofit that reduces emissions, in expectation, by 50 tons. My donation solves 0.000000003% of the problem and I feel like I have f
Recent opportunities in AI safety
20
Applications Open: Pivotal 2025 Q3 Research Fellowship
2 authors
· · 2m read
0
0
6
Register for the Stanford Existential Risks Initiative (SERI) Symposium
Grant Higerd-Rusli
· · 1m read
0
0
4
The Centre for Long-Term Resilience is recruiting a Policy and Operations Strategist
Tatiana K. Nesic Skuratova
· · 4m read
0
0
View more