Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by EAvalues🔸
2 min read 0

3

Building effective altruismCommunityOpportunities to take actionAnnouncements and updatesEAGxEffective Altruism GlobalVolunteering
Frontpage

One of the first major activity of the EA Values Project (an initiative dedicated to promoting, developing, and integrating the core values of Effective Altruism across our community, workplaces, and individual commitments) is to document human values especially EA core values from members of the EA community during EA Global and EAGx.

Why This Activity?

As EA continues to grow, especially in a world rapidly evolving with technological advancement and AI, maintaining alignment on our core values is more important than ever. The goal of the activity is to document and understand the values that drive individuals, organizations, and regions within the EA community, starting with participants at EAG and EAGx conferences. We believe that the EAG and EAGx conferences will be a great venue to get people who are either new to Effective Altruism or have been in the movement for a long time. 

What Will This Activity Involve?

We will be gathering insights on the core values that people and organizations uphold in their work and decision-making processes. This will include:

  • Conducting 1on1 with attendees who are:
    • New to Effective Altruism
    • Member of an EA group(s)
    • Founders or working in an EA affiliated organization
  • Sending a short survey after the conference.
  • Identifying regional variations on the core values.
  • Exploring how EA organizations and individuals integrate values into their missions and operations.
  • Collecting personal stories on how EA core values and principles shape decisions and actions.

How This Helps the EA Movement

By systematically documenting the values in different regions and EA communities, we aim to:

  • Foster deeper community engagement around our shared core values and principles.
  • Provide resources for individuals and organizations:
    • that can help align their actions with EA core values and principles.
    • improve and develop EAG and EAGx conferences.
    • improve and develop their own organization core values and principles.
  • Strengthen the cohesion and identity of the global EA movement.
  • Encourage reflection and development on how EA values evolve over time, across regions and contexts.

How You Can Participate

  • Share Your Insights: If you’re attending any of the EAG or EAGx conferences:
    • we would love to hear your stories on how EA core values and principles influence your decisions, work and life in a 1on1 or even just a short chat.
    • participate in our surveys.
    • email us of any resources, information or story you believe we should include in this project.
  • Volunteer: Help us:
    • meet more people in 1on1 at EAGx especially for people who speak the language of the region.
    • by sharing photos or videos of EA core values.

Let’s work together to document and reinforce the values that make EA a powerful force for good. We look forward to your thoughts, help and contributions. Feel free to comment or email us of any additional tasks, information or factor that we should consider, change or improve.

3

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Comments


No comments on this post yet.
Be the first to respond.
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 38m read
 · 
In recent months, the CEOs of leading AI companies have grown increasingly confident about rapid progress: * OpenAI's Sam Altman: Shifted from saying in November "the rate of progress continues" to declaring in January "we are now confident we know how to build AGI" * Anthropic's Dario Amodei: Stated in January "I'm more confident than I've ever been that we're close to powerful capabilities... in the next 2-3 years" * Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis: Changed from "as soon as 10 years" in autumn to "probably three to five years away" by January. What explains the shift? Is it just hype? Or could we really have Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)[1] by 2028? In this article, I look at what's driven recent progress, estimate how far those drivers can continue, and explain why they're likely to continue for at least four more years. In particular, while in 2024 progress in LLM chatbots seemed to slow, a new approach started to work: teaching the models to reason using reinforcement learning. In just a year, this let them surpass human PhDs at answering difficult scientific reasoning questions, and achieve expert-level performance on one-hour coding tasks. We don't know how capable AGI will become, but extrapolating the recent rate of progress suggests that, by 2028, we could reach AI models with beyond-human reasoning abilities, expert-level knowledge in every domain, and that can autonomously complete multi-week projects, and progress would likely continue from there.  On this set of software engineering & computer use tasks, in 2020 AI was only able to do tasks that would typically take a human expert a couple of seconds. By 2024, that had risen to almost an hour. If the trend continues, by 2028 it'll reach several weeks.  No longer mere chatbots, these 'agent' models might soon satisfy many people's definitions of AGI — roughly, AI systems that match human performance at most knowledge work (see definition in footnote). This means that, while the compa
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
SUMMARY:  ALLFED is launching an emergency appeal on the EA Forum due to a serious funding shortfall. Without new support, ALLFED will be forced to cut half our budget in the coming months, drastically reducing our capacity to help build global food system resilience for catastrophic scenarios like nuclear winter, a severe pandemic, or infrastructure breakdown. ALLFED is seeking $800,000 over the course of 2025 to sustain its team, continue policy-relevant research, and move forward with pilot projects that could save lives in a catastrophe. As funding priorities shift toward AI safety, we believe resilient food solutions remain a highly cost-effective way to protect the future. If you’re able to support or share this appeal, please visit allfed.info/donate. Donate to ALLFED FULL ARTICLE: I (David Denkenberger) am writing alongside two of my team-mates, as ALLFED’s co-founder, to ask for your support. This is the first time in Alliance to Feed the Earth in Disaster’s (ALLFED’s) 8 year existence that we have reached out on the EA Forum with a direct funding appeal outside of Marginal Funding Week/our annual updates. I am doing so because ALLFED’s funding situation is serious, and because so much of ALLFED’s progress to date has been made possible through the support, feedback, and collaboration of the EA community.  Read our funding appeal At ALLFED, we are deeply grateful to all our supporters, including the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which has provided the majority of our funding for years. At the end of 2024, we learned we would be receiving far less support than expected due to a shift in SFF’s strategic priorities toward AI safety. Without additional funding, ALLFED will need to shrink. I believe the marginal cost effectiveness for improving the future and saving lives of resilience is competitive with AI Safety, even if timelines are short, because of potential AI-induced catastrophes. That is why we are asking people to donate to this emergency appeal
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
We’ve written a new report on the threat of AI-enabled coups.  I think this is a very serious risk – comparable in importance to AI takeover but much more neglected.  In fact, AI-enabled coups and AI takeover have pretty similar threat models. To see this, here’s a very basic threat model for AI takeover: 1. Humanity develops superhuman AI 2. Superhuman AI is misaligned and power-seeking 3. Superhuman AI seizes power for itself And now here’s a closely analogous threat model for AI-enabled coups: 1. Humanity develops superhuman AI 2. Superhuman AI is controlled by a small group 3. Superhuman AI seizes power for the small group While the report focuses on the risk that someone seizes power over a country, I think that similar dynamics could allow someone to take over the world. In fact, if someone wanted to take over the world, their best strategy might well be to first stage an AI-enabled coup in the United States (or whichever country leads on superhuman AI), and then go from there to world domination. A single person taking over the world would be really bad. I’ve previously argued that it might even be worse than AI takeover. [1] The concrete threat models for AI-enabled coups that we discuss largely translate like-for-like over to the risk of AI takeover.[2] Similarly, there’s a lot of overlap in the mitigations that help with AI-enabled coups and AI takeover risk — e.g. alignment audits to ensure no human has made AI secretly loyal to them, transparency about AI capabilities, monitoring AI activities for suspicious behaviour, and infosecurity to prevent insiders from tampering with training.  If the world won't slow down AI development based on AI takeover risk (e.g. because there’s isn’t strong evidence for misalignment), then advocating for a slow down based on the risk of AI-enabled coups might be more convincing and achieve many of the same goals.  I really want to encourage readers — especially those at labs or governments — to do something
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
4
Call For a University of Minnesota EA Group
Kenneth_Diao
· · 2m read
0
0
45
The CEA Events Team is Hiring for Three Program Lead Positions
OllieBase
· · 3m read
0
0
49
EA Global Referral Program
Ivan Burduk
· · 2m read
8
8
View more