Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
OllieBase2
1
0

Thanks, it wasn't open at the time I posted this, but I've added the link now.

Reply
See in context
by OllieBase
2 min read 10

102

Building effective altruismOpportunities to take actionConferencesAnnouncements and updatesEAGxEffective Altruism Global
Frontpage

We’re very excited to announce our EA conference schedule for the rest of this year and the first half of 2025. EA conferences will be taking place for the first time in Nigeria, Cape Town, Bengaluru, and Toronto, and returning to Berkeley, Sydney, and Singapore.

  • EA Global: Boston 2024 applications are open, and close October 20.
  • EAGxIndia will be returning this year in a new location: Bengaluru. See their full announcement here.
  • EAGxAustralia has rebranded to EAGxAustralasia to represent the fact that many attendees will be from the wider region, especially New Zealand.
  • We’re hiring the teams for both EAGxVirtual and EAGxSingapore. You can read more about the roles and how to apply here.
  • EA Global will be returning to the same venues in the Bay Area and London in 2025.

Here are the full details:

EA Global

EAGx

 

 

We’re aiming to launch applications for events later this year as soon as possible. Please go to the event page links above to apply. If you'd like to add EAG(x) events directly to your Google Calendar, use this link.

Some notes on these conferences

  • EA Global conferences are run in-house by the CEA events team, whereas EAGx conferences (and EA summits) are organised independently by members of the EA community with financial support and mentoring from CEA.
  • EAGs have a high bar for admission and are for people who are very familiar with EA and are taking significant actions (e.g. full-time work or study) based on EA ideas.
  • Admissions for EAGx conferences and EA Summits are processed independently by the organizers. These events are primarily for those who are newer to EA and interested in getting more involved.
  • Please apply to all conferences you wish to attend—we would rather get too many applications for some conferences and recommend that applicants attend a different one than miss out on potential applicants to a conference.
  • We offer travel support to help attendees who are approved for an event but who can’t afford to travel. You can apply for travel support as you submit your application. Travel support funds are limited (though will vary by event), and we can only accommodate a small number of requests.
  • Find more info on our website.

Feel free to email hello@eaglobal.org with any questions, or comment below. You can contact EAGx organisers using the format [location]@eaglobalx.org (e.g. berkeley@eaglobalx.org and berlin@eaglobalx.org).

102

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Mentioned in

More posts like this

Comments10


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Danielle MacLean6
0
0

We also just announced the Vancouver Forum for Effective Altruism, taking place April 4-5 in Vancouver, Canada!

Be sure to check it out:  https://effectivealtruismcanada.com/vancouver-forum-for-effective-altruism/ 

Reply
Peter Wildeford8
6
0
4

I really appreciate these dates being announced in advance - it makes it much easier to plan!

Reply
Bryce Robertson4
0
0

This is a very useful summary, thanks. I've added those that were missing to AISafety.com/events-and-training.

I'm curious about why the Nigeria and South Africa events are called Summits instead of EAGx – would you mind expanding on the reasoning there? What will be the difference between a Summit and an EAGx? 

Reply
OllieBase7
0
0
2
1

Thanks Bryce!

Yes, we're testing out another tier of event with Summits. Summits are typically smaller, operate on a smaller budget, are often 1 day instead of 2–3 days and don't use CEA's application platforms. The idea here is that we can see if a location might be suitable for an EAGx event before we invest significant resources in supporting an EAGx.

We hope to share more about these events in a future post. 

Reply
Bryce Robertson1
0
0

Seems pretty reasonable – thanks!

Reply
Cathy Bogaart4
2
0

So exciting to see so many NEW EA conferences (Nigeria, Cape Town, Bengaluru, and Toronto). I'm on EA Canada's EAGxToronto organizing team and I see how much work it is to organize these events. Looking forward to attending my first one Aug 16-18. Then maybe I will apply for Boston's EAG in Nov! Are there any concerns about nearby conferences cannibalizing each others' potential audiences? Is there a maximum number of conferences that we think will produce the most effective outcome? I'm interested to know how CEA thinks about these things.

Reply
OllieBase5
1
0

Thanks Cathy :) 

Are there any concerns about nearby conferences cannibalizing each others' potential audiences? 

Yes, this is something we're tracking. We try and coordinate the European conferences in particular so that there isn't too much overlap. Most others serve very large regions so I'm less worried about those.

Is there a maximum number of conferences that we think will produce the most effective outcome?

We don't have an answer to that but it's also something we're thinking about. We hope to run more EAGx events in the coming years, since a lot of people travel a long way to attend the nearest EAGx event, and the costs of that travel can sometimes exceed the costs of running another event. The bottlenecks are around our capacity to support more events and strong regional organising teams (please apply if you’re interested!). We aren't currently planning to run more than three EA Globals a year. 

Reply
Adebayo Mubarak1
0
0

There is no link for the application of the EA South Africa Summits in Cape Town. 

Is that due to error or the registration is not open yet? 

Reply
OllieBase2
1
0

Thanks, it wasn't open at the time I posted this, but I've added the link now.

Reply
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
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
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
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
24
Last week to apply for the Futurekind AI Fellowship! (deadline: April 1)
Jay Luong
· · 1m read
0
0
46
EA Global Referral Program
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read
6
6
3
Apply to become a Futurekind AI Facilitator or Mentor (deadline: April 10)
Jay Luong
· · 2m read
0
0
View more