Hide table of contents

TLDR: We're opening a Constellation/Trajan/Lightone style office in Boston in 2023 and we're interested in user feedback.

We – Kaleem Ahmid, EV’s new Project Manager for the Boston Office, supervised by Jonathan Michel, EV’s Head of Property – are managing the creation of an office space in Harvard Square in Cambridge, Massachusetts. It is currently projected to open in the first half of 2023. The (currently unnamed) office will consist of a space dedicated to EA outreach, and a productivity-optimized, professional, interdisciplinary co-working space.

Our current plan includes: 

  • Student outreach: One section of the space will be outreach-focused, with a coworking/event space and various meeting spaces for students at Harvard and other Boston-area schools and offices for full-time outreach professionals.
  • Professional coworking space: One section will be dedicated to full-time professionals, in the style of Trajan House or Constellation, with private offices, meeting and coworking spaces, and various amenities. We imagine this will accommodate ~40 people at any given time.

Note that there will be a reasonably clear separation between these two spaces, e.g. being on different floors.

We won’t be settling on the final group of individuals and orgs who will work in the office space for a while, and reserve the right to make changes to the mix as the space develops. However, if you are interested, we encourage you to read on.

 If you might want to work in either of these spaces, please fill out our interest form ASAP for two reasons: 

  1. We are in the early design stages, and many of the decisions we will make benefit from potential-user input.
  2. As we approach the opening of the space, we will reach out to people who fill out this interest form as we build our initial community, including both full-time office occupants and tentative plans for a semester-long fellowship to work out of the office and talk to a bunch of students. So if you express interest early, your application will be considered when there are still plenty of spots to fill. Don’t wait too long!

We’re also interested in hearing about other people who you think we should consider reaching out to, or who should fill out this form. Feel free to tell us at the end of filling it out yourself, or send me a DM. Some examples of people we’d be interested in hearing from:

  • You are a dedicated and knowledgeable EA and would like to work from our office to engage with others members of the community.
  • You are working for an EA org, starting a new EA org, (in the area) and you are looking for an office.
  • You’re an experienced community builder and are interested in building the EA community at Harvard/MIT, and want to use the dedicated outreach space at the office to do so.
  • You’re working on an EA project which would benefit from being housed in a space full of other EAs or in proximity with university students.

Why a Boston/Cambridge, MA hub for outreach and EA more broadly?

The office will be located in the only two mile radius on earth home to two of the world’s top 5 universities, in the center of Harvard’s campus (less than 5 minutes walking-distance from the Kennedy School, the Law School, the Science Center, and most undergraduate residences), as well as being within half an hour of other well-regarded universities like Tufts, Boston University, Brandeis, Northeastern, Boston College, Suffolk University, Emerson, UMass Boston, and is right next to a subway station on the MBTA red line (15 minutes to MIT).

EA community building is a high-impact endeavor. Increasing the chances of Harvard and MIT students to pursue high-impact careers seems like a very valuable thing to do. A world-class office is one way to attract high-performing members of the EA community to come and work in close proximity with talented students with whom they can share exciting ideas and core values.

Boston is also already home to (at least some employees at) various EA organizations, including the Legal Priorities Project, Alvea, Kevin Esvelt’s Sculpting Evolution lab, CEA, and various university-affiliated and independent researchers and community builders/meta-EA professionals. We also expect more initiatives and organizations to be started in Boston which this office could house as well. Facilitating more information transfer and a sense of shared purpose between these groups and individuals seems important. Boston is also a ~17-minute drive from an airport with regular nonstop service to SF, London, DC, NYC, and Nassau, and is geographically central amongst that group of cities, making it a good point of convergence when needed.

Gratitude

We’d like to thank the team of people who have identified this space and have worked voluntarily on this project in their spare time up to this point – Trevor Levin, Christoph Winter, Lucius Caviola, and Nikola Jurkovic.

Comments8


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

What probability of wanting to work in the office/in Boston should you be at for filling out that form?

You can indicate uncertainty in the form, so feel free to fill it out and state your probability :)

I was already strongly considering moving to Boston, so this makes me feel lucky :)

Any updates on this? I am interested.

Checking in again :)

Any updates here?

didn't pan out, unfortunately

Curated and popular this week
LintzA
 ·  · 15m read
 · 
Cross-posted to Lesswrong Introduction Several developments over the past few months should cause you to re-evaluate what you are doing. These include: 1. Updates toward short timelines 2. The Trump presidency 3. The o1 (inference-time compute scaling) paradigm 4. Deepseek 5. Stargate/AI datacenter spending 6. Increased internal deployment 7. Absence of AI x-risk/safety considerations in mainstream AI discourse Taken together, these are enough to render many existing AI governance strategies obsolete (and probably some technical safety strategies too). There's a good chance we're entering crunch time and that should absolutely affect your theory of change and what you plan to work on. In this piece I try to give a quick summary of these developments and think through the broader implications these have for AI safety. At the end of the piece I give some quick initial thoughts on how these developments affect what safety-concerned folks should be prioritizing. These are early days and I expect many of my takes will shift, look forward to discussing in the comments!  Implications of recent developments Updates toward short timelines There’s general agreement that timelines are likely to be far shorter than most expected. Both Sam Altman and Dario Amodei have recently said they expect AGI within the next 3 years. Anecdotally, nearly everyone I know or have heard of who was expecting longer timelines has updated significantly toward short timelines (<5 years). E.g. Ajeya’s median estimate is that 99% of fully-remote jobs will be automatable in roughly 6-8 years, 5+ years earlier than her 2023 estimate. On a quick look, prediction markets seem to have shifted to short timelines (e.g. Metaculus[1] & Manifold appear to have roughly 2030 median timelines to AGI, though haven’t moved dramatically in recent months). We’ve consistently seen performance on benchmarks far exceed what most predicted. Most recently, Epoch was surprised to see OpenAI’s o3 model achi
Dr Kassim
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
Hey everyone, I’ve been going through the EA Introductory Program, and I have to admit some of these ideas make sense, but others leave me with more questions than answers. I’m trying to wrap my head around certain core EA principles, and the more I think about them, the more I wonder: Am I misunderstanding, or are there blind spots in EA’s approach? I’d really love to hear what others think. Maybe you can help me clarify some of my doubts. Or maybe you share the same reservations? Let’s talk. Cause Prioritization. Does It Ignore Political and Social Reality? EA focuses on doing the most good per dollar, which makes sense in theory. But does it hold up when you apply it to real world contexts especially in countries like Uganda? Take malaria prevention. It’s a top EA cause because it’s highly cost effective $5,000 can save a life through bed nets (GiveWell, 2023). But what happens when government corruption or instability disrupts these programs? The Global Fund scandal in Uganda saw $1.6 million in malaria aid mismanaged (Global Fund Audit Report, 2016). If money isn’t reaching the people it’s meant to help, is it really the best use of resources? And what about leadership changes? Policies shift unpredictably here. A national animal welfare initiative I supported lost momentum when political priorities changed. How does EA factor in these uncertainties when prioritizing causes? It feels like EA assumes a stable world where money always achieves the intended impact. But what if that’s not the world we live in? Long termism. A Luxury When the Present Is in Crisis? I get why long termists argue that future people matter. But should we really prioritize them over people suffering today? Long termism tells us that existential risks like AI could wipe out trillions of future lives. But in Uganda, we’re losing lives now—1,500+ die from rabies annually (WHO, 2021), and 41% of children suffer from stunting due to malnutrition (UNICEF, 2022). These are preventable d
Rory Fenton
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
Cross-posted from my blog. Contrary to my carefully crafted brand as a weak nerd, I go to a local CrossFit gym a few times a week. Every year, the gym raises funds for a scholarship for teens from lower-income families to attend their summer camp program. I don’t know how many Crossfit-interested low-income teens there are in my small town, but I’ll guess there are perhaps 2 of them who would benefit from the scholarship. After all, CrossFit is pretty niche, and the town is small. Helping youngsters get swole in the Pacific Northwest is not exactly as cost-effective as preventing malaria in Malawi. But I notice I feel drawn to supporting the scholarship anyway. Every time it pops in my head I think, “My money could fully solve this problem”. The camp only costs a few hundred dollars per kid and if there are just 2 kids who need support, I could give $500 and there would no longer be teenagers in my town who want to go to a CrossFit summer camp but can’t. Thanks to me, the hero, this problem would be entirely solved. 100%. That is not how most nonprofit work feels to me. You are only ever making small dents in important problems I want to work on big problems. Global poverty. Malaria. Everyone not suddenly dying. But if I’m honest, what I really want is to solve those problems. Me, personally, solve them. This is a continued source of frustration and sadness because I absolutely cannot solve those problems. Consider what else my $500 CrossFit scholarship might do: * I want to save lives, and USAID suddenly stops giving $7 billion a year to PEPFAR. So I give $500 to the Rapid Response Fund. My donation solves 0.000001% of the problem and I feel like I have failed. * I want to solve climate change, and getting to net zero will require stopping or removing emissions of 1,500 billion tons of carbon dioxide. I give $500 to a policy nonprofit that reduces emissions, in expectation, by 50 tons. My donation solves 0.000000003% of the problem and I feel like I have f
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
6
2 authors
· · 3m read