TLDR: Take the population ethics quiz here: https://mdickens.me/pop-ethics/
Population ethics is an oft-overlooked subfield within ethics. Many people hold views that they don't realize contradict each other, or that have strange implications that they wouldn't endorse if they thought about it more.
Not just that—population ethics is a BIG DEAL. A lot of ethical decisions hinge on how you think about changes in future populations....
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...
The swarm has made me feel AI risk in my bones for the first time
Until the Hugging Face / OpenAI swarm thing, I think I deep down felt pretty skeptical that extinction or serious loss of control scenarios were plausible in the next few years.
I’ve been lurking on LessWrong for years, and I remember being freaked out by Yudkowsky’s ‘List of Lethalities’ in 2022, and thinking that this did seem intellectually convincing, and maybe I should do something about it. But it didn...
I am relatively new to the community and am still getting acquainted with the shared knowledge and resources.
I have been wondering what the prevailing thoughts are regarding growing the EA community or growing the use of EA style thought frameworks. The latter is a bit imprecise, but, at a glance, it appears to me that having more organizations and media outlets communicate in a more impact-aware way may have a very high expected value.
What are people's thoughts on this problem? It likely fits into a meta-category of EA work, but lately I have been feeling that EA messaging and spread is an underserved area for improvement. It's possible I'm simply unaware of some difficulties or existing related efforts.
Welcome to the community!
Both of these are generally thought to be good things, though personally I'd expect growing the movement would be easier than spreading EA-style thought (partially because the EA community is small, while the outside world is big, so it's probably much easier to have a substantial relative impact in growing the community than in, for instance, getting the outside world to be more impact-aware, though there are other considerations). One caveat, though, is that rash attempts to grow the movement have the potential to be counterproductive.
Thank you very much for the welcome and for your thoughts!
That is a good point regarding the growth potential of the community itself, and certainly the quality of any growth would need to be a primary consideration.
My only counter-consideration to your point is that the bar to overcome is lower when convincing someone to adopt some aspect of EA-style methodology when compared to becoming a full EA community member. That being said, it certainly seems more concrete and easier to fathom how to grow the community, and less so for how to “spread EA style thinking”.
I think of GiveWell and 80,000 Hours as good examples of organizations that in their own way promote EA principles. Providing resources and tools for consumers seems to me a good way to increase reach, and perhaps there are areas that have not already been covered by existing EA-adjacent organizations.