115

I started drafting this about two years ago and gave a lightning talk on the idea at a community builders retreat. I tabled it, but I'm sharing it as a short post during Draft Amnesty Week.

Sometimes, I intentionally go to events where I know no one, just for the experience of being in a room full of strangers.

I spend so much time in self-made bubbles: bubbles of like-minded people, bubbles of colleagues, bubbles of family, bubbles of long-established friendship. I meet new people all the time. But I meet them because they have chosen to bravely enter my bubble. And that can make it very hard to remember what it's like to enter a room where you know no one.

I'm not shy and I don't experience social anxiety, but that becomes irrelevant when I don't know what awaits me on the other side of a door.

How many people will be there? Will I be the only one who knows no one? Will anyone want to talk to me? Will there be norms I don't know and breach? Will I have anything to say? Will I learn anything? Is any of this actually worth it?

I remember thinking this before I attended my first EA NYC event. And my first EAG. And basically every new event ever. And now, I force myself to find new spaces where I'll feel this way again, because otherwise I start to forget what it feels like.

I want to create a world where people feel empowered to do good and have access to spaces and connections that support them in that effort. That’s why I think a lot about how we welcome new people into EA and the causes within it. Not just in the formal sense of onboarding them with fellowships, 1-1 chats, or intro presentations, but in the more visceral, emotional sense of what it feels like to step into a room where you don’t know if you belong, or if you really can contribute.

It’s easy to forget how much courage it takes to walk into an unfamiliar space, especially when you’re no longer the newcomer. This is particularly true in tight-knit communities, where people already have shared references, common acquaintances, and an unspoken rhythm to their conversations. From the inside, these communities can feel warm and inviting. From the outside, they can feel impermeable.

For those of us who have been in EA for a while, I think it’s worth occasionally putting ourselves in that position—stepping into a room where we know no one. It’s a way to remind ourselves what it feels like to be new, to be an outsider looking in. And it’s a way to stay open to serendipity and perspectives we wouldn’t otherwise encounter.

Because ultimately, the rooms full of strangers are where movements grow. They’re where ideas spread beyond their starting circles and improve through new perspectives, where people take their first steps toward involvement, and where potential collaborators decide whether to step up, or step away.

So when was the last time you walked into a room full of strangers? And what might happen if you did it again?

115

0
0
15
2

Reactions

0
0
15
2

More posts like this

Comments3


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

I've grown accustomed to not bringing up EA and AI safety in my regular non-EA circles. It is too much of a headache trying to explain to people and although some are curious, I don't enjoy being pushy and opinionated.

In EA circles, I get a lot of validation and a sense of connection. My novel ideas and culture are shared so tightly with other EAs. I almost feel as if there is a recoil effect where I am now too lazy to explore EA tenets with non-EAs. I don't care for trying to build EA in others to give myself someone to talk to. (I am incredibly grateful for the EA community and I think that the recoil is minor compared to the benefit)

I generally find it extremely easy to be a normal dude day to day but mixing my EA world with my normal world is difficult. I don't talk about EA with my family or my buddies. I don't try to convince anyone outside of EA of anything and I probably should! I know AGI lab people who I could probably sway towards quitting their jobs or something haha.

Thank you for sharing! I liked this post :)) Recently I went to a social space I'd not been to before (which hasn't happened for a while) and I was surprised how anxious I felt at first. I was also surprised how lovely people were very quickly, and I think it's reminded me that new spaces full of strangers can actually be great places, albeit they don't stay 'strangers' for very long. 

"but in the more visceral, emotional sense of what it feels like to step into a room where you don’t know if you belong, or if you really can contribute."

Your writing feels like poetry. For this line, I think of... wanting to push for more culture where EA events & connections are more on the friendship/sports team side <---than--> networking/work, which will subsists on its own without any help due to the nature of the org. 

Curated and popular this week
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
Max Taylor
 ·  · 9m read
 · 
Many thanks to Constance Li, Rachel Mason, Ronen Bar, Sam Tucker-Davis, and Yip Fai Tse for providing valuable feedback. This post does not necessarily reflect the views of my employer. Artificial General Intelligence (basically, ‘AI that is as good as, or better than, humans at most intellectual tasks’) seems increasingly likely to be developed in the next 5-10 years. As others have written, this has major implications for EA priorities, including animal advocacy, but it’s hard to know how this should shape our strategy. This post sets out a few starting points and I’m really interested in hearing others’ ideas, even if they’re very uncertain and half-baked. Is AGI coming in the next 5-10 years? This is very well covered elsewhere but basically it looks increasingly likely, e.g.: * The Metaculus and Manifold forecasting platforms predict we’ll see AGI in 2030 and 2031, respectively. * The heads of Anthropic and OpenAI think we’ll see it by 2027 and 2035, respectively. * A 2024 survey of AI researchers put a 50% chance of AGI by 2047, but this is 13 years earlier than predicted in the 2023 version of the survey. * These predictions seem feasible given the explosive rate of change we’ve been seeing in computing power available to models, algorithmic efficiencies, and actual model performance (e.g., look at how far Large Language Models and AI image generators have come just in the last three years). * Based on this, organisations (both new ones, like Forethought, and existing ones, like 80,000 Hours) are taking the prospect of near-term AGI increasingly seriously. What could AGI mean for animals? AGI’s implications for animals depend heavily on who controls the AGI models. For example: * AGI might be controlled by a handful of AI companies and/or governments, either in alliance or in competition. * For example, maybe two government-owned companies separately develop AGI then restrict others from developing it. * These actors’ use of AGI might be dr
Joris 🔸
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
Last week, I participated in Animal Advocacy Careers’ Impactful Policy Careers programme. Below I’m sharing some reflections on what was a really interesting week in Brussels! Please note I spent just one week there, so take it all with a grain of (CAP-subsidized) salt. Posts like this and this one are probably much more informative (and assume less context). I mainly wrote this to reflect on my time in Brussels (and I capped it at 2 hours, so it’s not a super polished draft). I’ll focus mostly on EU careers generally, less on (EU) animal welfare-related careers. Before I jump in, just a quick note about how I think AAC did something really cool here: they identified a relatively underexplored area where it’s relatively easy for animal advocates to find impactful roles, and then designed a programme to help these people better understand that area, meet stakeholders, and learn how to find roles. I also think the participants developed meaningful bonds, which could prove valuable over time. Thank you to the AAC team for hosting this! On EU careers generally * The EU has a surprisingly big influence over its citizens and the wider world for how neglected it came across to me. There’s many areas where countries have basically given a bunch (if not all) of their decision making power to the EU. And despite that, the EU policy making / politics bubble comes across as relatively neglected, with relatively little media coverage and a relatively small bureaucracy. * There’s quite a lot of pathways into the Brussels bubble, but all have different ToCs, demand different skill sets, and prefer different backgrounds. Dissecting these is hard, and time-intensive * For context, I have always been interested in “a career in policy/politics” – I now realize that’s kind of ridiculously broad. I’m happy to have gained some clarity on the differences between roles in Parliament, work at the Commission, the Council, lobbying, consultancy work, and think tanks. * The absorbe
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
46
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read