Mods, please delete if this is deemed outside the rules.
 

First, I want to disambiguate that this post entry in the Donation Election is for PauseAI US. I realized today that the EA Forum database of orgs has me associated with just "PauseAI", which is ambiguous. PauseAI is the overarching name of the movement. PauseAI US is a separate legal entity from the other PauseAIs, the official PauseAI of the United States, and the one that I (Holly Elmore) run. 

Second, PauseAI US appears to be doing well in the Donation Election with a good shot at winning! I'm going to make a further case than my AMA and fundraising pitch post for why I think you should select PauseAI US. 

It seems that our top competitor at the moment is the Animal Welfare Fund. While the AWF is a great cause, and one I gave a portion of my pledge donations to many times myself in the past, I wanted to point out that PauseAI US, as the smaller organization and a political org that is excluded from many common charitable funding sources, can particularly benefit from smaller donations like this Donation Election in a way that an established fund does not particularly benefit from. 

Before I had incorporated PauseAI US, I was working as an individual organizer. I was able to quit my previous job because I received donations ranging from about $400-$10,000 from Giving What We Can donors who didn’t need the donation to be tax-deductible. I also received a Lightspeed grant as an individual. I quickly got to work establishing PauseAI US as a 501(c)(3) election h and PauseAI US Action Fund as a 501(c)(4), a process that is still not complete that can take over a year and a half. I acquired a fiscal sponsor, Manifund, which allows our org to share in their 501(c)(3) status, so I could begin to seek grants from foundations. This is all startup work that the EA Animal Welfare Fund doesn't have to do. 

If you don't give to the AWF, they won't go back to being one person or stop existing. PauseAI US is trying to reach that level of stability, but we are still early, and so you have a high leverage opportunity to help. I needed the runway provided by individual donations and a grant offered to an individual for charitable purposes to even get in the big grant game, and this is a game that you get much better at the longer your org's track record is and the more hours you can dedicate to fundraising. The rich get richer. I am the Executive Director, which at this stage means I'm also the exclusive fundraiser on top of starting and running the org.

All of which is to say, PauseAI US has a bright future. We are ~unique in AI Safety in our grassroots protesting and lobbying approach, our simple, accessible, and moderate but firm stance ("Pause AI"), and our independence from both the AGI companies and Open Philanthropy. If you are reading this, you are well-situated to understand just how important it is that we make it through the straits of these early days and have more precious time to work on the solution to AI danger. Please make the high leverage choice. 

21

5
4

Reactions

5
4

More posts like this

Comments3


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

I should also add the context that Open Phil will not fund us for political reasons. We have no big funders-- it's all down to people like you!

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
There’s something deeply wrong with the world, when the median US college graduate’s starting salary is a dozen times higher than the price to save another person’s entire life. The enduring presence of such low-hanging fruit reflects a basic societal failure to allocate resources in a way that reflects valuing those lives appropriately. (If you personally earn over $60k, and agree that your least-important $5k of personal spending is not nearly as important as a young child’s entire life, I’d encourage you to reallocate your budget accordingly and save someone’s life today. Then, if you’re happy with the results, consider taking the🔸10% Pledge to make it a regular thing. This should be the norm for anyone who is financially comfortable.) It’s a tricky thing. If you really let yourself internalize this fact—that children are dying for want of $5000—it can be hard to think of anything else. How can life just go on as normal, when children are dying and we could easily prevent it? Why don’t more people treat this as the ongoing moral emergency that it is? Where is the urgency? Why aren’t most of the people around us doing anything? Will you break through the barrier? Psychological Defense 1: moral delusion In order to live anything approximating a “normal life”, in these circumstances, we need to develop psychological defenses to block out the cacophony of global demands. And so we do. (Few are willing to be the sorts of radical altruists profiled in Strangers Drowning. I know I’m not!) We learn to turn away, and ignore the needs of the world outside our local bubble. If people try to draw our attention back, we may even react with hostility: accusing them of being “preachy”, or “holier-than-thou”, or engaging in some kind of underhanded “guilt-tripping.” (How dare you break the social contract of mutually supporting each other’s delusions of decency, as we sip champagne while children starve?) We find—and elevate—other moral causes, preferably ones “closer to h
 ·  · 13m read
 · 
The following is the annual year in review post Fish Welfare Initiative (FWI) publishes, cross-posted from our blog. As always, we welcome any questions or input anyone may have. We'd also like to add that we're especially grateful to the EA community: FWI, in many ways, would never have been founded and probably would not have persisted without the support the community has provided. - Tom and Haven (FWI cofounders) Message from the Cofounders In our 2023 in Review, we characterized that year as one of setup: It was the year where, more than any before, we realized that our current programs probably didn’t meet our (at that point intuitive) thresholds for further scaling. In response, we launched our new R&D Department, with the goal of developing new interventions that would warrant broader scaling. June 2023: FWI staff constructing and measuring the small ponds at our experimental site.August 2024: Those same ponds, now filled, in use for our Feed Fortification Study. If 2023 was the year of setup of a new, R&D-focused strategy, then 2024 was where we began its execution. A flawed, complicated, and messy execution certainly, but overall a promising one. In terms of program development, 2024 was the year where we: * Ran multiple studies to develop new or improve current interventions, such as our studies on satellite imagery and feed fortification. * Investigated more scalable strategies with our farm program, such as predictive models and adjusted visit frequency. * Tested collaborations with a promising partner to assess their ability to scale welfare interventions. We believe these outcomes will be significant in continuing to improve our farm program, as well as to develop new interventions, over the coming years. Another particular highlight of 2024 was formalizing FWI’s long-term vision—working in multiple lower/middle-income countries executing interventions that are scalable, cost-effective, and evidence-based—and more precisely defining what mini
 ·  · 1m read
 ·