Crossposted from Twitter

As the year comes to an end, we want to highlight some of the incredible work done and supported by people in the effective altruism community — work that's helping people and animals all over the world.

1/ The team at Charity Entrepreneurship incubated five new charities this year, including the Center for Effective Aid Policy and Vida Plena — the first CE-incubated organisation to operate in Latin America. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/isggu3woGwkpYzqwW/presenting-2022-incubated-charities-charity-entrepreneurship

2/ Over 1,400 new people signed the Giving What We Can Pledge, committing to giving away 10% or more of their annual income to effective charities. The total number of pledgers is now over 8,000! https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/about-us/members

3/ The work of The Humane League and other animal welfare activists led 161 new organisations to commit to using cage-free products, helping free millions of chickens from cruel battery cages. https://chickenwatch.org/progress-tracker?filterK=Cage-free

4/ Open Philanthropy launched two new focus areas: South Asian Air Quality and Global Aid Policy. It's already made grants that aim to tackle pollution and increase the quality or quantity of foreign aid.
https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/global-aid-policy/ and https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/south-asian-air-quality/ 

5/ Alvea, a new biotechnology company dedicated to fighting pandemics, launched and announced that it had already started animal studies for a shelf-stable COVID vaccine. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/alvea-launches-scalable-shelf--stable-dna-vaccine-development-against-new-sars-cov-2-variants-301483557.html

6/ Almost 80,000 connections were made at events hosted by @CentreforEA's Events team, prompting people to change jobs, start new projects and explore new ideas. EAGx conferences were held around the world — including in Berlin, Australia and Singapore. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/DajpFcaMrHv4fPLTy/cea-s-work-in-2022#Events

7/ The EU Commission said it will "put forward a proposal to end the ‘disturbing’ systematic practice of killing male chicks across the EU" — another huge win for animal welfare campaigners. https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/news/victory-chicks-eu-commission-propose-end-male-chick-culling

8/ What We Owe The Future, a book by @willmacaskill arguing that we can — and should — help build a better world for future generations, became a bestseller in both the US and UK. https://whatweowethefuture.com

9/ New evidence prompted @GiveWell to re-evaluate its views on water quality interventions. It then made a grant of up to $64.7 million for @EvidenceAction's Dispensers for Safe Water water chlorination program, which operates in Kenya, Malawi and Uganda. https://blog.givewell.org/2022/04/06/water-quality-overview/

10/ Lots of members of the effective altruism community were featured on @voxdotcom's inaugural Future Perfect 50 list of the people building a better future. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/23399287/future-perfect-50-change-agents

11/ Fish welfare was discussed in the UK Parliament for the first time ever, featuring contributions from effective-altruism-backed charities. https://animalequality.org/news/historic-uk-parliament-discusses-the-suffering-of-farmed-fish/

12/ Researchers at @iGEM published a paper looking at how we might be able to better detect whether states are complying with the Biological Weapons Convention — work which could help improve biosecurity around the world. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4213018

13/ New research from the Lead Exposure Elimination Project showed the dangerous levels of lead in paint in Zimbabwe and Sierra Leone. In response, governments in both countries are working with LEEP to try to tackle the problem and reduce lead exposure.
https://leadelimination.org/paint-study-results-sierra-leone/ and https://leadelimination.org/new-study-zimbabwe-botswana/ 

14/ The EA Forum criticism contest sparked a bunch of interesting and technical debate. One entry prompted GiveWell to re-assess their estimates of the cost-effectiveness of deworming, and inspired a second contest of its own!
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/NFhELFno7ScuCxXMY/the-winners-of-the-change-our-mind-contest-and-some#Prize_for_inspiring_the_Change_Our_Mind_Contest____20_000 

15/ The welfare of crabs, lobsters and prawns was recognised in UK legislation thanks to the new Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill https://www.crustaceancompassion.org/single-post/great-news-what-next

16/ Rethink Priorities, meanwhile, embarked on their ambitious Moral Weight Project to provide a better way to compare the interests of different species. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/hxtwzcsz8hQfGyZQM/an-introduction-to-the-moral-weight-project

17/ At the @medialab, the Nucleic Acid Observatory project launched — working to develop systems that will help provide an early-warning system for new biological threats. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/gLPEAFicFBW8BKCnr/announcing-the-nucleic-acid-observatory-project-for-early

18/ Longview Philanthropy and @givingwhatwecan launched the Longtermism Fund, a new fund supporting work on reducing existential risks. It's already supporting important work in AI safety, biosecurity and nuclear security. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/KKoDGiSkfsnco8iQf/longtermism-fund-december-2022-grants-report

19/ In general it's been an exciting year for the AI alignment community. As researcher John Wentworth puts it, there's been "gradual convergence toward a technical alignment paradigm". https://www.alignmentforum.org/posts/BzYmJYECAc3xyCTt6/the-plan-2022-update

20/ A new survey from @KatjaGrace showed that 48% of AI experts think there's a 10% or greater chance of advanced AI leading to an "extremely bad" outcome — helping to outline the importance of the problem and the need to do more work here. https://aiimpacts.org/what-do-ml-researchers-think-about-ai-in-2022/

21/ And researchers at @AnthropicAI developed a new technique for training less harmful AI assistants. https://twitter.com/AnthropicAI/status/1603791161419698181 

This is just a small fraction of the incredible work done and supported by the effective altruism community this year. A full thread would be hundreds, if not thousands, of tweets long! And we're very excited to see all the work that the community does in 2023.

If you want to learn more or get involved:

And have a very happy new year!

Thank you to posts from ElliotJDavies and Lewis Bollard which we used to help compile this list. And thanks to Emma Richter, Lizka Vaintrob, Ollie Base, Angelina Li and many others for helping with the research process and contributing ideas.

Comments14


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Charity Navigator’s opening to EA is another big gain. Hoping for some posts on it soon.

I think this post is really useful — more people should probably see it — and I'm curating it (although it's not the sort of thing I usually curate).

To quote the Celebrations and gratitude thread from September: 

We often have high standards in effective altruism. This seems absolutely right: our work matters, so we must constantly strive to do better.

But we think that it's really important that the effective altruism community celebrate successes:

  • If we focus too much on failures, we incentivize others/ourselves to minimize the risk of failure, and we will probably be too risk averse.
  • We're humans: we're more motivated if we celebrate things that have gone well


Thanks for all your work, everyone. 

[Disclaimer: Shakeel and I are at CEA, and I'm affiliated with a couple of the projects listed.]

I suspect some of the advocates involved in the animal welfare victories listed here might be taken aback to see them listed as "in EA". The movements for animal rights and animal welfare long predate effective altruism. What makes these things "in EA"?

My guess (without looking at specific examples) is started by people within the EA community, or those that reference EA in their explanations for what they do, or that started the project through EA funding sources (less certain about this one, starting through EA funding is probably more likely to be EA, but there are organisations that get EA funding that are not considered EA).

Those all seem like reasonable criteria! Again focusing on the animal welfare examples, my guess is that several of them wouldn't meet any of those criteria, though it would depend on how loosely several things are defined.

The animal welfare items were: 

  • The work of The Humane League and other animal welfare activists led 161 new organisations to commit to using cage-free products, helping free millions of chickens from cruel battery cages.
  • The EU Commission said it will "put forward a proposal to end the ‘disturbing’ systematic practice of killing male chicks across the EU" — another huge win for animal welfare campaigners.
  • Fish welfare was discussed in the UK Parliament for the first time ever, featuring contributions from effective-altruism-backed charities.
  • The welfare of crabs, lobsters and prawns was recognised in UK legislation thanks to the new Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill
  • Rethink Priorities, meanwhile, embarked on their ambitious Moral Weight Project to provide a better way to compare the interests of different species.

Of these, it seems like the first, third, and fifth items have clear EA links, but the second and fourth are less clear. I'd be interested to hear if there were EA-linked orgs significantly involved in advocacy around either the UK animal sentience legislation or the EU commission male chick culling ban proposal.

I'm a "long time" "animal welfare" "EA" and I'm confused by Jamie's thread here.

I agree that I think it's possible to co-opt and take credit, and this is bad.

I'm not sure this has happened here. I don't understand Jamie's purpose. I'm worried his comment is unnecessarily disagreeable.

It's good to have good people (EA) do good work on animal welfare. It's great if this list draws attention to work that we think EAs should support.

Yeah, no particular purpose other than to 

(1) reduce the chance that effective altruism does end up co-opting and/or incorrectly taking credit. (I don't expect that Shakeel was intentionally trying to do this.)

(2) Lower priority, but I was intrigued about how the phrase "in EA" was being used more generally. Context: I think that what gets counted as "EA" or not often rests a lot on self-identification, which I don't see as a particularly important or useful consideration. I'm more interested in whether projects seem cost-effective (in expectation), or at least whether people seem to be actually be putting the 'core principles' of EA to good use. (Here's CEA's list on that.) I suspect what's going on here though is more about whether the projects have been Open Phil funded.

Great list! Thank you for compiling this.

Re: #5, I'd be interested in hearing more from the Alvea team about what ultimately transpired with the "animal studies," which were controversial the last time I saw them come up on the Forum.

Thanks, I wasn't aware of some of these outside my cause areas/focus/scope of concern. Very nice to see others succeeding/progressing!

Given how much things are going on in EA these days (I can't keep up even with the forum) might be good to have this as a quarterly thread/post and maybe invite others to celebrate their successes in the comments.

The biggest development IMO is the researcher engagement with GiveWell, particularly involving quantifying uncertainty (as well as modelling transparency and quality control).

Minor quibble, but this should be titled 'New Good things that happened in EA this year'.

There's already loads of existing good things happening, that shouldn't get forgotten about. I don't have the numbers, but I'd like to know- how many nets did AMF distribute? How many times did animal charities expose abuse and take companies to court to protect existing laws?

I know this stuff is happening, and it's great and we should hear more about existing, ongoing good work

I was also really excited about OpenPhil's Cause Exploration Prize. Not as much the results as the entries themselves. So many new opportunities for us to make the world better!

[comment deleted]1
0
0
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
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
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
46
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read