Headline finding: I audited 17 AI Safety Talent programmes. Zero of 17 have published any comparison group, rejected-applicant follow-up, matched control or randomisation. Not one. Every programme that mentions a counterfactual does it by asking participants to self-report.
Background
At least $70 million...
Author: Grace Ryba (she/her), Executive Director
TL;DR:
* BluePerch is a new animal welfare grantmaker.
* Grant applications aren't open yet - we're aiming to open applications in roughly mid-2027.
* We welcome early expressions of interest from potential grantseekers so we can notify you when applications open - express your interest here or see further details below.
* We're also seeking boa...
In celebration of still being alive and fighting, we are giving away 1,000 Amazon e-books of “If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies”. Feel free to send a copy to yourself, a loved one, or a friend—we need all hands on deck.
Today marks exactly one year since If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies: Why Superhuman AI Would Kill Us All, by Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soare...
[I did not downvote]
The paper IMO spends too little time on the important question, which is how much impact you get per dollar. The paper instead assumes that you could plausibly hasten developing full aging reversal by 1 second for 5,500$.
For neglectedness, it would be good to discuss current funding levels. Gemini suggested ballpark 11 billion annually.
For tractability, it would be good to discuss particular research lines that have had success. For example, how much have we lengthened mice lifespans? What is our rate of progress there?
Also, many folks on the EA Forum dislike posting links without copying the text to the forum. I mostly agree, although IMO it is fine to do in a 'Quick Take'.
Thanks for your feedback. I will repost a revised version, which doesn’t address your three main points, but which is I think more compelling.