Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by DavidConrad, Cillian_
6 min read 0

43

AI safetyCareer choiceEffective givingPolicyEuropean Union Funding request (open)Giving Season (2024)Marginal Funding WeekResearch training programs
Frontpage

In the spirit of Marginal Funding Week 2024, we are asking for your help to support Talos Network in 2025 as we continue to train the next generation of leaders in AI policy. Your donation will directly contribute to our ability to deliver the Talos Fellowship in its current form and to expand to new fellowship streams. 

Now is a particularly critical time to grow the pool of talented people working in AI governance, especially in Europe as the EU AI Office continues to ramp up. Your donation will have a direct impact on the number of fellows we can train and place at key organisations providing vital guidance on EU AI policy.

 

Executive Summary

  • Talos Network reduces the risks from advanced AI by training and placing talented professionals in European AI policy roles through our fellowship program. We've graduated 66 fellows to date, with the majority now working in influential AI governance positions.
  • We're seeking funding to fill our 2025 budget gap ($2.9M) at a critical time:
    • The EU AI Office is actively building its team and implementing the EU AI Act
    • We have the capacity to grow rapidly (applications for the fellowship have increased from 32 in 2022 → 1,000 for Spring 2025, and we continue to add new fellowship streams and placement organisations)
    • Our current funding runway ends in January 2025
  • Your marginal donation can have immediate impact:
    • $18,000 = one additional fellow placement at a major EU think tank
    • Many placements convert to full-time roles in AI governance

What do we do?

Talos Network (formerly Training for Good) is dedicated to fostering the next generation of leaders in AI policy. 

We primarily do this through the Talos Fellowship (formerly the EU Tech Policy Fellowship), where, each year, we enable 40-50 promising early-career professionals to:

  • participate in an 8-week training programme on EU AI policy fundamentals,
  • attend a 7-day policymaking summit in Brussels to network with key actors in the EU AI policy sphere,
  • pursue a 4-6 month placement at a prestigious think tank or organisation working in AI policy, and
  • receive personalised support & coaching to confidently initiate a career in tech policy.

We have graduated 66 fellows to date, with many Talos alumni now working in impactful roles at the EU AI Office and in senior roles at leading Brussels-based think tanks.

What would Talos Network do with marginal funds?

Marginal funding right now would go to filling Talos Network's 2025 funding gap, which is most of our ~$2.9M annual budget. Specifically, this funding would enable:

  • Running the next two cohorts of our flagship Talos Fellowship program, supporting 35-40 new fellows through intensive training and placements in European and international AI policy.
  • Launching a new fellowship stream beyond our 17 existing think tank placements (e.g., placements in EU institutions, technical AI governance roles, or international organisations)
  • Hiring a new CEO to lead Talos Network through its next phase of growth

Why do we need your help?

We are at an inflection point for the organisation. Cillian Crosson, our founder and executive director, is leaving to focus on running Tarbell and we are in the process of hiring a new CEO in 2025. We also have growth plans including launching a new stream of the fellowship in the next year and adding additional placement positions with international organisations, including the OECD. 

To attract a top-quality CEO and ensure we can continue to operate in 2025, we need to secure a funding runway. 

We are reaching out to large donors but still have significant room for marginal funding from individuals. In particular, every $18,000 allows us to offer an additional placement to one of our fellows. These placements are particularly impactful as many placements convert into full-time roles for candidates who otherwise may not have entered the field, or make our fellows particularly competitive candidates for other roles in AI governance and policy. 

Reasons in favour of donating to Talos Network

  1. We have a history of demonstrated impact. The majority of our 2022-23 alumni have transitioned into highly impactful AI policy roles, including a co-chair for one of the EU AI Act CoP Working Groups. Other fellows have secured full-time roles at the EU AI Office, UK AI Safety Institute, and think tanks including RAND and the Future of Life Institute. During their placements our fellows have completed impactful projects at organisations including Ada Lovelace, Apollo Research and the International Center for Future Generations. We also have past fellows working in policy entrepreneurship roles such as the founder of an AI chip safety start-up.
  2. We are directly transitioning technical AI talent into governance roles in particular. Recent reports have emphasised the need for “people with technical expertise — in machine learning, information security, computing hardware, or other relevant technical domains — to work in AI governance and policy making”. We have demonstrated an ability to support people with advanced technical research degrees and experience as they transition into direct policy careers.
  3. AI Governance is still an underrepresented cause area. While there has been significant growth in the attention paid to AI governance in the last few years there are still far fewer people working on governance than on capabilities. It is difficult to find accurate estimates here, but leading AI scientists continue to call for more governmental oversight, and the number of staff at just OpenAI is approximately an order of magnitude greater than the number of staff at the EU AI Office and UK AI Safety Institute combined. If we want strong regulation that can create and enforce guardrails for safe AI development then we need a far healthier balance of people working in AI governance vs. capabilities. 
  4. European AI governance is a high-leverage opportunity. The passage of the EU AI Act and the potential for a Brussels effect mean that the EU could be a particularly high-impact way to steer AI governance. The EU AI Office is in the process of building its team and determining how it will implement the AI Act. Decisions made today will have an outsized impact on AI governance for the coming decade and so it is essential that talented people who understand and care about systemic risks from advanced AI are given the tools they need to contribute.
    Further, there is some evidence that a Trump presidency will involve a significant reduction in the regulation of AI in the United States, increasing the relative importance of the EU for global governance.
  5. We have room to grow. Interest in the Talos Fellowship has grown dramatically - from just 32 applications in 2022 to nearly 1,000 for our Spring 2025 cohort. We have built relationships with new placement organisations and have plans to develop new fellowship streams to cater to this increased demand.
  6. We are funding constrained for 2025. Our current funding runway only extends to January 2025, and if we are unable to raise significant funding in the next two months we will need to consider pausing our work. This would be a particularly bad outcome right now as our work is very time-critical for the reasons mentioned above. 

Reasons against donating to Talos Network

  1. You may value direct safety research over governance. It is possible that policy is relatively well-funded compared to direct AI safety research and that an incremental dollar directed to an impactful safety project could have a greater impact.
  2. You may believe that other jurisdictions are more important for AI governance. We are currently focused on the EU and other international institutions as they are playing an important role in AI governance but are underserved by organisations like ours. However if you disagree with this assessment then you may believe your marginal dollar would be better directed towards an organisation operating in the US or Chinese policy space. 

How your funding can help

Your marginal donation can have direct impact:

  • $18,000 funds one additional fellow's full placement at a major think tank working on EU or international AI policy
  • $60,000 enables a week-long policymaking summit in Brussels for our fellows

How can you help?

The easiest way to help is to donate directly. Every donation, big or small, will help us to continue supporting the next generation of AI policy professionals at this critical time. 

Simply make a donation to the following account, or reach out to me directly at david@talosnetwork.org if you have any questions. 

  • Account Holder: Talos Network gUG
  • Address: Müllerstrasse 138D, Berlin 13353 Germany
  • IBAN: BE61 9679 9690 3217
  • BIC: TRWIBEB1XXX

We're very happy to respond to any questions in the comments below. 

43

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments


No comments on this post yet.
Be the first to respond.
Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
Neel Nanda
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
TL;DR Having a good research track record is some evidence of good big-picture takes, but it's weak evidence. Strategic thinking is hard, and requires different skills. But people often conflate these skills, leading to excessive deference to researchers in the field, without evidence that that person is good at strategic thinking specifically. I certainly try to have good strategic takes, but it's hard, and you shouldn't assume I succeed! Introduction I often find myself giving talks or Q&As about mechanistic interpretability research. But inevitably, I'll get questions about the big picture: "What's the theory of change for interpretability?", "Is this really going to help with alignment?", "Does any of this matter if we can’t ensure all labs take alignment seriously?". And I think people take my answers to these way too seriously. These are great questions, and I'm happy to try answering them. But I've noticed a bit of a pathology: people seem to assume that because I'm (hopefully!) good at the research, I'm automatically well-qualified to answer these broader strategic questions. I think this is a mistake, a form of undue deference that is both incorrect and unhelpful. I certainly try to have good strategic takes, and I think this makes me better at my job, but this is far from sufficient. Being good at research and being good at high level strategic thinking are just fairly different skillsets! But isn’t someone being good at research strong evidence they’re also good at strategic thinking? I personally think it’s moderate evidence, but far from sufficient. One key factor is that a very hard part of strategic thinking is the lack of feedback. Your reasoning about confusing long-term factors need to extrapolate from past trends and make analogies from things you do understand better, and it can be quite hard to tell if what you're saying is complete bullshit or not. In an empirical science like mechanistic interpretability, however, you can get a lot more fe
Ronen Bar
 ·  · 10m read
 · 
"Part one of our challenge is to solve the technical alignment problem, and that’s what everybody focuses on, but part two is: to whose values do you align the system once you’re capable of doing that, and that may turn out to be an even harder problem", Sam Altman, OpenAI CEO (Link).  In this post, I argue that: 1. "To whose values do you align the system" is a critically neglected space I termed “Moral Alignment.” Only a few organizations work for non-humans in this field, with a total budget of 4-5 million USD (not accounting for academic work). The scale of this space couldn’t be any bigger - the intersection between the most revolutionary technology ever and all sentient beings. While tractability remains uncertain, there is some promising positive evidence (See “The Tractability Open Question” section). 2. Given the first point, our movement must attract more resources, talent, and funding to address it. The goal is to value align AI with caring about all sentient beings: humans, animals, and potential future digital minds. In other words, I argue we should invest much more in promoting a sentient-centric AI. The problem What is Moral Alignment? AI alignment focuses on ensuring AI systems act according to human intentions, emphasizing controllability and corrigibility (adaptability to changing human preferences). However, traditional alignment often ignores the ethical implications for all sentient beings. Moral Alignment, as part of the broader AI alignment and AI safety spaces, is a field focused on the values we aim to instill in AI. I argue that our goal should be to ensure AI is a positive force for all sentient beings. Currently, as far as I know, no overarching organization, terms, or community unifies Moral Alignment (MA) as a field with a clear umbrella identity. While specific groups focus individually on animals, humans, or digital minds, such as AI for Animals, which does excellent community-building work around AI and animal welfare while
Recent opportunities in AI safety
28
Apply to the Cambridge ERA:AI Fellowship 2025
Harrison 🔸
· · 3m read
0
0
24
Last week to apply for the Futurekind AI Fellowship! (deadline: April 1)
Jay Luong
· · 1m read
0
0
57
Quick nudge to apply to the LTFF grant round (closing on Saturday)
calebp
· · 1m read
7
7
View more