Hide table of contents

Excalidraw is a collaborative, shared whiteboard for typed text and sketching. It's really useful for summarising notes & making diagrams for forum posts; it's one of the tools I've used a lot to make these tutorials! Its key attractions are simplicity and easy collaboration. It’s designed for quickly creating simple graphics, and has a ‘sloppy/whiteboard’ style.

This post is a simple tutorial for how to use excalidraw. The landing page also has a pretty good introduction to the basic features. 

When can Excalidraw be useful?

  • Visually summarise an argument 
  • Summarise notes on a topic
  • Build a logic model to help you think through a problem
  • Have a debate over zoom, but draw diagrams for one another in real-time to help explain your point
  • Represent the AI governance or whole AI safety community diagrammatically 

Video Guide

Text Guide

Basic Features


 

If you’d prefer a worked example, you’re looking at one! The above image was made in Excalidraw. Here’s another:

 

The point here isn’t that this is a perfect, wonderful diagram that’s much better than the original– it isn’t. The point is that this took 5-10 minutes to make without having to spend time learning a complex tool, and could be done collaboratively.

Collaboration & Export

In the top right box, you can export your whole drawing either as a file to load back into Excalidraw or as an image. You can press the ‘Live Collaboration’ button to start a session. 

Once you start a session, you can copy a link which gives anybody access to real-time collaboration on your current board. 

When any member leaves the session, they ‘take a version with them’, which they can keep editing locally. 

If you want to keep your whiteboard and re-use it later, you can save it either as an Excalidraw file (editable later) or an image file. 

Libraries

You can also import libraries of icons made in Excalidraw using the book icon at the top of the screen (to the right of the other tools). There are only a few libraries available right now, but it can be useful for common icon sets.

Worked Examples

These are both examples I actually used! The first I made live with somebody while I was running a tutorial on the topic, the second I made as a quick summary for a discussion group. I've linked the source for the second, but the first was from the top of my head.

Summarise a topic (medical causes of headache):

Summarise a topic (patient philanthropy):

 

Personal Thoughts

I really like Excalidraw! It's a very polished implementation of a quick sketching tool, and the collaborative features, like the rest of Excalidraw, work exactly how I'd want them to without any fidgeting. 

At the moment, the icon libraries feature is pretty sparse, consisting mostly of UI and software architecture symbols, but there's nothing stopping you publishing EA-related symbol libraries!

I was mildly irritated there were no options to save canvasses in the web app, which it turns out is behind a 7$/month paywall. This might be worth it if you're using it a lot, but the offline saving options are pretty comprehensive. Maybe consider it to support the tool's continued existence.

Finally, Excalidraw is a somewhat limited tool not suited to really complex diagrams, but this isn't really its intended purpose. If you want to make more precise or detailed diagrams, I can personally recommend Affinity Designer, and GIMP is a reasonable free alternative. This space is pretty saturated, but they all (to my knowledge) have a much steeper learning curve than Excalidraw, and I'm not aware of more powerful tools with equivalent live collaboration.

Try it Yourself!

Try making a sketch of how your job leads to impact! Share it in the comments, so people can compare different jobs & different styles of diagram.

We'll also be running a session on Monday the 30th at 6pm GMT in the EA GatherTown to discuss Excalidraw and do a short exercise!

On Monday: a post discussing Squiggle, a coding language for model-building!

Comments14


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

I bookmarked it and found a chance to use it already today! In general, I appreciate finding out about tools for rational discourse enhancement. Encouraging others to post them even if they don't get too many upvotes. 

There also exists an Excalidraw plug-in for Obsidian which I personally found very valuable.

Hi Nico,

You might also want to try the recently released Obsidian Canvas. I've found both Excalidraw and Canvas to be phenomenal (and free) diagramming tools.

I have a list of other diagramming tools on my public Zotero library here.

CG
3
0
0

Excalidraw + Obsidian's infinite canvas core plugin is truly a delight that I'm excited to see develop further. Lots of possibilities for better epistemics/PKM, and even more incredibly underrated for public sense-making/social epistemics in Obsidian.

As a meta point for these types of tutorials, I would recommend a short section on alternative tools with a short discussion of pros and cons for each alternative.

Right now, this feels more like an advert for excalidraw rather than an open exploration of the options out there.

Yeah, I think you're right and this was a mistake of mine.  I picked this list via generating  possibilities from friends, Twitter and my own use, then asking for feedback on an epistemics slack, and primarily picking the most easy-to-use-seeming ones in each category (Edited to add: and because I liked the idea of not necessarily picking the absolute best things but just getting more of this kind of thing used), but it would have been worth doing a little digging into competitors in each to make sure we weren't missing some good things + being able to give more context.

This is a really great point! Thank you for raising it. I'll see about adding it to future posts.

Does anyone know how this differs from similar-sounding options like Miro, Mural and Lucidspark?

I'm doing AGI Safety Fundamentals right now and they use Miro, and I like it a lot; for the purpose of running a class, I'd use Miro over Excalidraw based on my current experience with both. For more general diagram-making, I'm not yet sure, but if you end up having thoughts we'd love to add them to the post.

Yep, Excalidraw is great! I also used it to make this post:

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/TvrfY4c9eaGLeyDkE/induction-heads-illustrated

Great tool; I've enjoyed it and used it for two years. I (a random EA) would recommend it.

Would recommend it, I use it for most of my diagrams & I like it enough to have gotten a premium subscription.

I should clarify the inspiration to pick excalidraw originally came from Nuno's recommendation, I then played with it and liked it, just so that people don't double update :)

I really love this piece of software, but the only thing that really gets me is the inability to take hand-written sections of notes. sometimes i just need to sketch a graph or a visual representation of something, and excalidraw is really too clunky for my experience. 

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
 ·  · 8m read
 · 
In my past year as a grantmaker in the global health and wellbeing (GHW) meta space at Open Philanthropy, I've identified some exciting ideas that could fill existing gaps. While these initiatives have significant potential, they require more active development and support to move forward.  The ideas I think could have the highest impact are:  1. Government placements/secondments in key GHW areas (e.g. international development), and 2. Expanded (ultra) high-net-worth ([U]HNW) advising Each of these ideas needs a very specific type of leadership and/or structure. More accessible options I’m excited about — particularly for students or recent graduates — could involve virtual GHW courses or action-focused student groups.  I can’t commit to supporting any particular project based on these ideas ahead of time, because the likelihood of success would heavily depend on details (including the people leading the project). Still, I thought it would be helpful to articulate a few of the ideas I’ve been considering.  I’d love to hear your thoughts, both on these ideas and any other gaps you see in the space! Introduction I’m Mel, a Senior Program Associate at Open Philanthropy, where I lead grantmaking for the Effective Giving and Careers program[1] (you can read more about the program and our current strategy here). Throughout my time in this role, I’ve encountered great ideas, but have also noticed gaps in the space. This post shares a list of projects I’d like to see pursued, and would potentially want to support. These ideas are drawn from existing efforts in other areas (e.g., projects supported by our GCRCB team), suggestions from conversations and materials I’ve engaged with, and my general intuition. They aren’t meant to be a definitive roadmap, but rather a starting point for discussion. At the moment, I don’t have capacity to more actively explore these ideas and find the right founders for related projects. That may change, but for now, I’m interested in