Cross-posted from my Substack.
Epistemic status: I’ve puzzled over this for a long time but I’m not sure I came to the right answers. I'm sharing this partly because it might help others work on resource allocation, but mostly because some smarter reader might tell me how to do it better.
TL;DR:
* I he...
With the AI windfall, mental health may be taken increasingly seriously by mainstream EA. There’s increasingly room to explore the cause area and answer some of the biggest uncertainties; at the same time, costs of the most effective interventions are continuing to fall. StrongMinds is now treating for ~$35, about a third of GiveWell’s best guess from a few years ago, and is expected to...
Would it be a good idea to have AI safety experts be put under a lie detector to make it more plausible to the doubters (who believe AI risk is a marketing stunt) that AI risk is real. Some skeptics may be swayed if they believe AI safety experts are Genuinely concerned. I am aware that lie detectors are not very reliable and can give false positive or negative results, but this may work. I intuitively think this is not a good idea, and think I have likely overlooked a key flaw.