Hide table of contents

Introduction

(Note: Consider any work of fiction I mention to be a spoiler risk. I've made sure each title is in bold italics so you can quickly scan and, if you don't want to risk spoiling yourself, quickly move on)

This summer a film came out which captured the hearts and minds of EAs. Focused on a fantastic performance from the lead in the title role, it was based around one of the most lasting creations of the 20th century which continues to have profound consequences to this day, but was told with skill by a talented director and is regarded by many as one of the best films released this year.

But enough about Barbie... Christopher Nolan's nuclear epic Oppenheimer was released on the very same day and a major plot thread was the threat that, in testing their new creation, the team at Los Alamos could inadventantly bring about the end of the world (and also any future for humanity). It also questioned whether the bomb should have ever been created at all, how the US ought to have dealt with growing nuclear tensions with the Soviet Union, and many other important themes.

I saw it with non-EA friends and really enjoyed the discussion about it afterwards, where people touched on themes and ideas that are often found in EA Forum posts and classic EA-recommended sources. It got me thinking about other places where I've seen EA-adjacaent or EA-explicit films in fiction before, so here I present my (somewhat off the top) list to consider:[1]

My (non-exhaustive) List

Outer Wilds (2019)- To be honest I think this is the best videogame ever made, so if you have any interest at all in those you should stop reading this now and start playing this game.[2] I'm going to say nothing else about it, except that it's fairly easy to read some parts of the plot in a longtermist way

It's a Wonderful Life (1946) - This Christmas Classic may be the most obviously EA non-EA piece of fiction ever:

  • A man gets to see the counterfactual impact of his life and judge whether it did good or not. 80,000 Hours need to call Clarence Odbody stat!
  • Indeed, it actually centers on the question not just of his actions but his existence or non-existence too
  • Our protagonist is relentlessly altruistic, and our antagonist is relentlessly greedy (and he definitely doesn't earn-to-give)
  • A potential bio-risk is averted even at personal cost to the person intervening
  • A child is saved from drowning in a pond

This is not a coincidence because nothing is ever a coincidence.

Strong Female Protagonist (2012-2018) - Great webcomic (one of the best things I've read this year I think). Unfortunately it got put on hiatus on the final issue and never came back, but issue 3 deals will some pretty explicitly EA dilemmas. In fact, so much of it reads like grappling with EA ideas in a superhero story.

Okja (2017) - Director Bong doesn't make bad films. This one isn't an allegory, it's just about an attempt to save an animal from the cruelty it would face at the hands of the factory-farming complex. It's also got criticism of working within the capitalist system for your EA-sceptical friends too! Would make a powerful but tough double-bill with Animal Liberation Now.

Person of Interest (2011-2016) - How do you create a TV show about rival superintelligent AIs vying for the future of humanity? Simple, don't tell the network, pitch it as a buddy-cop drama with a twist, and slowly reveal the "real" plot once your show has momentum. Also a candidate for the most underrated TV show of all time.

Chernobyl (2019) - "What is the cost of lies?". I had to find something which really fits the "Improving Institutional Decision-Making" cause area that I feel drawn towards. After the initial disaster our characters (as well as many extras) show great bravery and moral character, but are constantly constrained and fighting against an inherentely broken set of institutions that limit the effectiveness of their actions. 

Schindler's List (1993) - There's a particular scene, near the end of the film, which is very relevant to Singer's thought experiment about what you would give up to save a life, and the question of where your limits of responsibility are in a world which contains injustice, suffering, and evil. Amongst an incredibly powerful and moving film, this scene has stood out to me.

What do you think?

Are we underestimating the impact that fiction can have in introducing EA concepts to a wider audience? Is there a way to help promote this, or is it impossible to 'pick winners' in what is essentially a creative process? 

I'd also really like to hear your own examples of engaging with a piece of fiction and having your EA-proximity alarm go off, feel free to add examples in the comments (though, of course, be mindful of spoilers if so)

  1. ^

    If you haven't seen/read/played one of the above, and you're on this Forum, then I'd strongly recommend all of them! 

  2. ^

    And after you finish the base game, download and play the DLC

Comments4


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Seconding Strong Female Protagonist, and noting that it is also available as a printed graphic novel for those who prefer to read offline

  • Frankenstein (Mary Shelley): moral circle expansion to a human created AI, kinda.
  • Elizabeth Costello (J M Coetzee): novel about a professor who gives animal rights lectures. The chapter that's most profoundly about animal ethics was published as "The Lives of Animals" which was printed with commentary from Peter Singer (in narrative form!).
  • Darkness at Noon (Arthur Koestler): Novel with reflections from an imprisoned old Bolshevik, reflecting on his past revolutionary activity. Interesting reflections on ends vs. means reasoning, and on weighing considerations of moral scale / the numbers affected vs personal emotional connection in moral tradeoff scenarios.

One trillion dollars by Andreas Eschbach

Random guy ends up with a one trillion dollar fortune, and tries to use it to make the workd a better place.

Themes include:

-consideration of longterm vs. short term effects

-corruption through money and power

-doomerism

-galaxybraining yourself into letting go of deontological norms

-a carecature of an EA as an antagonist

More from JWS 🔸
102
106
JWS 🔸
· · 5m read
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 32m read
 · 
Summary Immediate skin-to-skin contact (SSC) between mothers and newborns and early initiation of breastfeeding (EIBF) may play a significant and underappreciated role in reducing neonatal mortality. These practices are distinct in important ways from more broadly recognized (and clearly impactful) interventions like kangaroo care and exclusive breastfeeding, and they are recommended for both preterm and full-term infants. A large evidence base indicates that immediate SSC and EIBF substantially reduce neonatal mortality. Many randomized trials show that immediate SSC promotes EIBF, reduces episodes of low blood sugar, improves temperature regulation, and promotes cardiac and respiratory stability. All of these effects are linked to lower mortality, and the biological pathways between immediate SSC, EIBF, and reduced mortality are compelling. A meta-analysis of large observational studies found a 25% lower risk of mortality in infants who began breastfeeding within one hour of birth compared to initiation after one hour. These practices are attractive targets for intervention, and promoting them is effective. Immediate SSC and EIBF require no commodities, are under the direct influence of birth attendants, are time-bound to the first hour after birth, are consistent with international guidelines, and are appropriate for universal promotion. Their adoption is often low, but ceilings are demonstrably high: many low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) have rates of EIBF less than 30%, yet several have rates over 70%. Multiple studies find that health worker training and quality improvement activities dramatically increase rates of immediate SSC and EIBF. There do not appear to be any major actors focused specifically on promotion of universal immediate SSC and EIBF. By contrast, general breastfeeding promotion and essential newborn care training programs are relatively common. More research on cost-effectiveness is needed, but it appears promising. Limited existing
Ben_West🔸
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
> Summary: We propose measuring AI performance in terms of the length of tasks AI agents can complete. We show that this metric has been consistently exponentially increasing over the past 6 years, with a doubling time of around 7 months. Extrapolating this trend predicts that, in under a decade, we will see AI agents that can independently complete a large fraction of software tasks that currently take humans days or weeks. > > The length of tasks (measured by how long they take human professionals) that generalist frontier model agents can complete autonomously with 50% reliability has been doubling approximately every 7 months for the last 6 years. The shaded region represents 95% CI calculated by hierarchical bootstrap over task families, tasks, and task attempts. > > Full paper | Github repo Blogpost; tweet thread. 
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
For immediate release: April 1, 2025 OXFORD, UK — The Centre for Effective Altruism (CEA) announced today that it will no longer identify as an "Effective Altruism" organization.  "After careful consideration, we've determined that the most effective way to have a positive impact is to deny any association with Effective Altruism," said a CEA spokesperson. "Our mission remains unchanged: to use reason and evidence to do the most good. Which coincidentally was the definition of EA." The announcement mirrors a pattern of other organizations that have grown with EA support and frameworks and eventually distanced themselves from EA. CEA's statement clarified that it will continue to use the same methodologies, maintain the same team, and pursue identical goals. "We've found that not being associated with the movement we have spent years building gives us more flexibility to do exactly what we were already doing, just with better PR," the spokesperson explained. "It's like keeping all the benefits of a community while refusing to contribute to its future development or taking responsibility for its challenges. Win-win!" In a related announcement, CEA revealed plans to rename its annual EA Global conference to "Coincidental Gathering of Like-Minded Individuals Who Mysteriously All Know Each Other But Definitely Aren't Part of Any Specific Movement Conference 2025." When asked about concerns that this trend might be pulling up the ladder for future projects that also might benefit from the infrastructure of the effective altruist community, the spokesperson adjusted their "I Heart Consequentialism" tie and replied, "Future projects? I'm sorry, but focusing on long-term movement building would be very EA of us, and as we've clearly established, we're not that anymore." Industry analysts predict that by 2026, the only entities still identifying as "EA" will be three post-rationalist bloggers, a Discord server full of undergraduate philosophy majors, and one person at