Hide table of contents

Retreatsdescribed by Leilani Bellamy of the new EA org Canopy Retreats as "a gathering of people with a common interest or goal, all sharing space over the course of a weekend or a week"—are increasing in popularity within university groups, local groups, and EA orgs. They typically involve presentations, group and 1-1 discussions, and bonding activities, and they sometimes produce tangible outputs.

I worry that the term "retreat" also contributes to optics issues because it (1) implies opulence (e.g. "wellness retreats"), (2) harkens to religious retreats and may increase "cult" vibes, and (3) doesn't actually capture the work that occurs (i.e. when I've said I'm going on a retreat, friends have assumed I'm on vacation).

Thoughts on alternative terms?

New Answer
New Comment


7 Answers sorted by

I agree that we should call them something other than retreats, especially because of points 1) and points 3) - lots of people in the EA community basically don't understand that a full day of "retreat" causes the same level of exhaustion as a full day of EAG.

Ideas:

  • Work Sprint Weekend
  • Intensive Workshop
  • Summit

I think that what we currently call retreats seem diverse enough that the events might deserve entirely different names. Organisers could put more care into choosing a term, on a case-by-case basis, that accurately sets expectations. Some retreats I've heard of do appear to entail spending a few days in the countryside forming better bonds within a group. In that case, calling it a "retreat" would be reasonable.

"Conference"

"Conference" is widely used by the academic and professional community to describe these types of events. It doesn't really have much baggage associated with it, and avoids much of the "vacation" connotation.

I like the term "Summit"

To me, summit feels a bit too grand and “culminatory” (or whatever the word is), either because I think of summits bringing together disparate groups of people (e.g., from different universities/countries) or at the end of some project.

8[anonymous]
For multiple people who have been brainstorming to replace the word "retreat" for many months, the word "summit" actually grants a particularly desirable culminating spirit. One common problem reported by organizers is that students are far from being ambitious enough  in their summer, extracurricular, and post-graduation plans. The ubiquity of this observation leads myself and others to want to choose very deliberately exciting and forceful words. "Summit" has remained a good option in my mind and in the minds of a few other student organizers after almost a year of thinking about this issue because it makes the event seem more ambitious―more serious. In turn, this kind of environment makes students take themselves more seriously. It is important to highlight that a student demographic audience is the dispositive quality in this situation that makes me insist on the above.
1
Chriswaterguy
"Mini-summit"? Less elegant, but maybe more fitting.

I’ve also had similar thoughts, but haven’t really thought about alternative names until now. Still, I’m not quickly thinking of obviously-great alternatives. Perhaps “EA Workshops” or “Seminars”?

Having said that, it’s worth pointing out that although “retreats” can often be used in religious contexts, there is plenty of usage in the sense of “corporate retreats.” So ultimately the label may not be that bad, it’s more a matter of how it’s framed and whether it involves a lot of people who are new to/unfamiliar with EA.

Seminar is also pretty religious. I very much like "EA workshops"

[This comment is no longer endorsed by its author]Reply
9
Pablo
I think you get that vibe because, in Spanish, the word seminario can mean both seminar ("an occasion in which a group of people meet to study and discuss something") and seminary ("a college for training people to become priests").
1
Adrià Garriga Alonso
Oops, thank you for the correction! My mistake. I still like "EA workshop" more, since attendees are thinking about their life plans and working on improving them.
3
Charles He
I have never heard of "seminar" having a lot of religious overtones (but I'm in North America).  (Speaking from a North American perspective) "seminar" has some negative properties if you’re trying to describe a meeting where a lot of value comes from interactions between participants: * It gives connotations of teaching and being "didactive" (getting knowledge instructed to you by an authority). * In North America, there are also unlikeable hucksters that call things "seminars" (so just borrowing the name is bad if it’s not genuinely a lecture or instruction, there can be sort of an “uncanny valley” of “bad vibes”)  
3[anonymous]
I have flown "seminar" by many people without religious perception. Do you think that you have this perception because of the Spanish seminario ?

Alternatives:

  • Summit
  • The [Blank] Intensive
    ("Intensive" works as a noun, and the preceding word can be a relevant descriptor)

My favourite thing about using the word retreat (that also comes with the downside of point 2) is a sense of intentional community building that other terms like workshop and summit don't capture. On top of this, it seems pretty clear that EAs relate to and run retreats quite differently from the average person. My sense is that we might run into similar issues with any other term we pick, e.g. parties at a 'workshop' or intense work rooms at a 'team-building event'.

It might be worth coining a new term similar to how we have made EAG/x a common word instead of relying solely on the word 'conference'. I don't have any meaningful creative inputs on this yet, but the low bar would probably be something along the lines of EA___.

Comments3
Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Strong agree with the connotation of retreat being associated with leisure/opulence and that this is an optics issue. I think this is hard to answer in the abstract and the event should probably just pick a name that corresponds to what is happening. E.g., AI governance learning weekend; EA [City] community gathering weekend; etc

I suspect that we're overthinking things if we're avoiding the word "retreats". Public perceptions matter to a degree, but we shouldn't overdo it.

I think the costs of using a different word seem very low, and the potential benefits of slightly better PR seem high, so I think things like this are worth thinking about.

I also think retreats / summits are probably towards the extreme end of “things in EA which seem culty”, so are particularly worth thinking about.

More from Rockwell
115
Rockwell
· · 2m read
551
Rockwell
· · 7m read
300
Rockwell
· · 1m read
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 52m read
 · 
In recent months, the CEOs of leading AI companies have grown increasingly confident about rapid progress: * OpenAI's Sam Altman: Shifted from saying in November "the rate of progress continues" to declaring in January "we are now confident we know how to build AGI" * Anthropic's Dario Amodei: Stated in January "I'm more confident than I've ever been that we're close to powerful capabilities... in the next 2-3 years" * Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis: Changed from "as soon as 10 years" in autumn to "probably three to five years away" by January. What explains the shift? Is it just hype? Or could we really have Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) by 2028?[1] In this article, I look at what's driven recent progress, estimate how far those drivers can continue, and explain why they're likely to continue for at least four more years. In particular, while in 2024 progress in LLM chatbots seemed to slow, a new approach started to work: teaching the models to reason using reinforcement learning. In just a year, this let them surpass human PhDs at answering difficult scientific reasoning questions, and achieve expert-level performance on one-hour coding tasks. We don't know how capable AGI will become, but extrapolating the recent rate of progress suggests that, by 2028, we could reach AI models with beyond-human reasoning abilities, expert-level knowledge in every domain, and that can autonomously complete multi-week projects, and progress would likely continue from there.  On this set of software engineering & computer use tasks, in 2020 AI was only able to do tasks that would typically take a human expert a couple of seconds. By 2024, that had risen to almost an hour. If the trend continues, by 2028 it'll reach several weeks.  No longer mere chatbots, these 'agent' models might soon satisfy many people's definitions of AGI — roughly, AI systems that match human performance at most knowledge work (see definition in footnote).[1] This means that, while the co
saulius
 ·  · 22m read
 · 
Summary In this article, I estimate the cost-effectiveness of five Anima International programs in Poland: improving cage-free and broiler welfare, blocking new factory farms, banning fur farming, and encouraging retailers to sell more plant-based protein. I estimate that together, these programs help roughly 136 animals—or 32 years of farmed animal life—per dollar spent. Animal years affected per dollar spent was within an order of magnitude for all five evaluated interventions. I also tried to estimate how much suffering each program alleviates. Using SADs (Suffering-Adjusted Days)—a metric developed by Ambitious Impact (AIM) that accounts for species differences and pain intensity—Anima’s programs appear highly cost-effective, even compared to charities recommended by Animal Charity Evaluators. However, I also ran a small informal survey to understand how people intuitively weigh different categories of pain defined by the Welfare Footprint Institute. The results suggested that SADs may heavily underweight brief but intense suffering. Based on those findings, I created my own metric DCDE (Disabling Chicken Day Equivalent) with different weightings. Under this approach, interventions focused on humane slaughter look more promising, while cage-free campaigns appear less impactful. These results are highly uncertain but show how sensitive conclusions are to how we value different kinds of suffering. My estimates are highly speculative, often relying on subjective judgments from Anima International staff regarding factors such as the likelihood of success for various interventions. This introduces potential bias. Another major source of uncertainty is how long the effects of reforms will last if achieved. To address this, I developed a methodology to estimate impact duration for chicken welfare campaigns. However, I’m essentially guessing when it comes to how long the impact of farm-blocking or fur bans might last—there’s just too much uncertainty. Background In
gergo
 ·  · 11m read
 · 
Crossposted on Substack and Lesswrong. Introduction There are many reasons why people fail to land a high-impact role. They might lack the skills, don’t have a polished CV, don’t articulate their thoughts well in applications[1] or interviews, or don't manage their time effectively during work tests. This post is not about these issues. It’s about what I see as the least obvious reason why one might get rejected relatively early in the hiring process, despite having the right skill set and ticking most of the other boxes mentioned above. The reason for this is what I call context, or rather, lack thereof. Subscribe to The Field Building Blog On professionals looking for jobs It’s widely agreed upon that we need more experienced professionals in the community, but we are not doing a good job of accommodating them once they make the difficult and admirable decision to try transitioning to AI Safety. Let’s paint a basic picture that I understand many experienced professionals are going through, or at least the dozens I talked to at EAGx conferences. 1. They do an AI Safety intro course 2. They decide to pivot their career 3. They start applying for highly selective jobs, including ones at OpenPhilanthropy 4. They get rejected relatively early in the hiring process, including for more junior roles compared to their work experience 5. They don’t get any feedback 6. They are confused as to why and start questioning whether they can contribute to AI Safety If you find yourself continuously making it to later rounds of the hiring process, I think you will eventually land the job sooner or later. The competition is tight, so please be patient! To a lesser extent, this will apply to roles outside of AI Safety, especially to those aiming to reduce global catastrophic risks. But for those struggling to penetrate later rounds of the hiring process, I want to suggest a potential consideration. Assuming you already have the right skillset for a given role, it might
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
49
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read