Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
RobertHarling2
0
0

Thanks Wyatt, we're aware these timings can be hard for students. We're looking into what we could organise in the summer to be more accessible.

Reply
See in context
by RobertHarling
4 min read 7

74

Building effective altruismApplication announcementsConferencesEffective Altruism Global
Frontpage

TL;DR:

Apply now
  • Applications for EAG Bay Area close this Sunday, Feb 9th!
  • It’s already on track to be one of our biggest ever US EAGs, but we’d like to make it even bigger.
  • Due to our current catering and venue costs, it’s relatively cheap at the moment to add extra attendees. So please don’t avoid applying because you’re worried about cost or taking someone else’s space!
  • If you’ve been accepted already, please register as soon as possible to confirm your place and get access to Swapcard.

Updates and Reminders

We wanted to share a few quick updates and reminders about EAG: Bay Area, happening Feb. 21–23. We’d love for you to apply (deadline Feb. 9th), and encourage friends and colleagues (especially ones in/near the Bay Area) to apply, perhaps by sharing this post! 

  • This year’s EA Global: Bay Area will not be focused only on global catastrophic risks (as it was last year) and will be the same as other EAGs. We're dropping the GCR-focus because CEA is aiming to focus on principles-first community building, and because a large majority of attendees last year said they would have attended a non-GCR focused event anyway.
    • We welcome applications regardless of the cause you’re focused on, as long as it’s informed by EA principles.
  • We recently wrote a post discussing the admissions bar for EA Global and received feedback that the approval rate to EAG is higher than many readers suspected (~84% acceptance rate). The post also discusses why we have an admissions process, what we look for in applications, and why you should apply.
  • As of 2024, we’ve decided to weigh EA context less heavily for those with significant work experience, to encourage engagement from more mid- to late-career professionals.
  • Given our current contracts with our catering provider and venue, it is relatively cheap for us to accept additional attendees. Please don’t avoid applying out of concern you might be taking up someone else’s spot.

Why you should apply to EA Global

We suspect there are many people who clearly meet the admissions bar who are not applying

While the number of applications to EA Global 2024 are more than double five years earlier, they have declined each of the last two years. There are likely several contributing factors here, such as a reduction in travel support availability, general trends in community building, and limited marketing efforts over the past couple of years. (We're excited though that we're on track to reverse this trend and increase attendance significantly in 2025!)

We also suspect that declining numbers could, in some part, be influenced by a widespread belief that the admissions bar for EA Global is high. However, this most recent year we approved around 84% of applications. Currently, we suspect there are many people who will clearly meet the bar who are not applying.

In general, we are excited to receive more applications in 2025 and beyond; one of our core aims moving forward is to increase EAG attendance while maintaining attendee satisfaction and curation. 

Events are expensive; we don’t want this to deter applications

EA Globals cost a significant amount of money to run. Some anecdotal feedback suggests that people in our core target audience are not applying for fear that the value they expect to gain is not worth the cost to our team. 

While we sincerely appreciate support from attendees and thoughtfulness towards the cost of our events, we believe that subsidising EA Global attendance is a good use of EA resources, based on analyses of our feedback surveys and actions taken by attendees as a result of the event. Additionally, the marginal costs of extra attendees can vary due to a range of considerations, including various fixed costs that come with events. In the case of EAG: Bay Area, because of minimum spend requirements in our catering contract, we can absorb more attendees without increasing our food costs by much. Our team has the best context on relevant cost considerations—getting admitted to an EAG means that we are willing to cover your attendance. Feel free to defer to our judgement. 

If you’re considering applying to EA Global, we encourage you to apply. If you would like support from our team in deciding whether EA Global is right for you, please reach out to hello@eaglobal.org or comment below. 

How others have gotten value out of EA Global

We believe EA Global has a strong track record of providing value to attendees:

  • Many EA orgs come to EAGs actively looking to hire for roles — you’ll be able to chat directly with them at our Organization Fair, and send 1-1 meeting requests to relevant employees.
  • Many senior professionals in a variety of EA cause areas attend EAG with the main aim of providing advice and mentorship to newer community members. EAG is a great place to speak to people who work in career paths you're considering and get advice.
  • People working at the cutting edge of many cause areas will be attending and able to share their insights through talks, workshops and 1-1s.

Below, you can see some highlights from EAG Boston:

 

And we're excited to preview some of the great speakers we'll be hosting:

 

Let us know if you have any questions in the comments, or by emailing hello@eaglobal.org. 

74

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments7


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Danielle MacLean3
0
0

Just wanted to say, for anyone on the fence about attending these conferences, DO IT!

I just returned from it, and am leaving lit up and inspired about all the people and organizations working so hard to change the world.  There's a lot of negativity out there, but also - so much great working being done.

If you're considering diving in deeper into EA, please do it (and tell everyone you know!). 

Reply
Mihkel Viires 🔹5
0
0
1

Just submitted my application. This post was the encouragement that motivated me to apply, so thank you.

Reply
Patrick Hoang3
1
2

I feel like this is too short notice with EAG conferences. Three weeks is not a lot of time between receiving your decision and flying to the Bay Area making arrangements. Maybe it is because I am a student.

Reply
Toby Tremlett🔹9
6
0

I'm not from the EAG team - but this event was actually announced and advertised a long time ago. This (from what I understand) is a last push to get extra attendees :)

Reply
frances_lorenz8
0
0

That's correct, thanks Toby :) Although, it's really important for us to know if our advertising has been reaching people. We definitely want to know if this post is the first time someone's hearing about EAG, especially if they would have attended had they heard about it earlier. 

Reply
Wyatt S.1
0
0
1

I would like to attend, but I have too much schoolwork and would have trouble catching up. A summer conference would be more accessible for me as a college student.

Reply
RobertHarling2
0
0

Thanks Wyatt, we're aware these timings can be hard for students. We're looking into what we could organise in the summer to be more accessible.

Reply
More from RobertHarling
72
Announcing EA Global 2025
RobertHarling
· · 1m read
4
4
63
What are the key claims of EA?
RobertHarling
· · 9m read
11
11
78
X-risks to all life v. to humans
RobertHarling
· · 5m read
33
33
View more
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
LewisBollard
 ·  · 8m read
 · 
> How the dismal science can help us end the dismal treatment of farm animals By Martin Gould ---------------------------------------- Note: This post was crossposted from the Open Philanthropy Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post. ---------------------------------------- This year we’ll be sharing a few notes from my colleagues on their areas of expertise. The first is from Martin. I’ll be back next month. - Lewis In 2024, Denmark announced plans to introduce the world’s first carbon tax on cow, sheep, and pig farming. Climate advocates celebrated, but animal advocates should be much more cautious. When Denmark’s Aarhus municipality tested a similar tax in 2022, beef purchases dropped by 40% while demand for chicken and pork increased. Beef is the most emissions-intensive meat, so carbon taxes hit it hardest — and Denmark’s policies don’t even cover chicken or fish. When the price of beef rises, consumers mostly shift to other meats like chicken. And replacing beef with chicken means more animals suffer in worse conditions — about 190 chickens are needed to match the meat from one cow, and chickens are raised in much worse conditions. It may be possible to design carbon taxes which avoid this outcome; a recent paper argues that a broad carbon tax would reduce all meat production (although it omits impacts on egg or dairy production). But with cows ten times more emissions-intensive than chicken per kilogram of meat, other governments may follow Denmark’s lead — focusing taxes on the highest emitters while ignoring the welfare implications. Beef is easily the most emissions-intensive meat, but also requires the fewest animals for a given amount. The graph shows climate emissions per tonne of meat on the right-hand side, and the number of animals needed to produce a kilogram of meat on the left. The fish “lives lost” number varies significantly by
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
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
41
EA Global Referral Program
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read
0
0
24
Last week to apply for the Futurekind AI Fellowship! (deadline: April 1)
Jay Luong
· · 1m read
0
0
10
EAGxNordics in Norway: apply now
Amalie Farestvedt 🔸
· · 3m read
1
1
View more