Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
by Vaidehi Agarwalla 🔸
1 min read8 answers 9

67

LessWrong
Frontpage

Edit 11 Feb 2022: Jeremy made a post about starting a low-commitment LW Article club where he'd be linkposting articles on a weekly basis from this list for people to engage with! 

Context / Motivation: 

  • I am interested in thinking a lot recently about how we could share ideas from the rationalist community to EA and related subcommunities (perhaps communicating the same ideas in different ways).
  • I've been diving into LessWrong recently and remembered why I hadn't for a while - it's really overwhelming. Even with the sequences and curation, it's a lot of content, and it's not always obvious to me which posts I'd find most valuable.
  • I think it's better to read fewer posts in more depth to properly understand them.
  • I think it's likely that some posts or ideas will be much more relevant to EAs than others, but I'm not sure which ones

My ask:

  • I'd be interested in recommendations for standlone posts (e.g. All debates are bravery debates), specific concepts (e.g. schelling fence or doublecrux) , or specific sequences (e.g.)
  • If you have time, I'd love to know why it's valuable to you

67

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Mentioned in
Load more (5/25)
New Answer
New Comment


8 Answers sorted by
Top

Pablo

16
0
0

I'm a big fan of some of the early LessWrong content, e.g.

More generally, I'd recommend much of the content by Scott Alexander ("Yvain"), Paul Christiano, Wei Dai, Gwern, Greg Lewis ("Thrasymachus"), Anna Salamon and Carl Shulman (I'm probably forgetting other names).

Aaron Gertler 🔸

10
0
0

Privileging the Question changed my life in college. I don't know how useful it would be for the average person already involved in EA, but it played a huge role in my not getting distracted by random issues and controversies, and instead focusing on big-picture problems that weren't as inherently interesting. I'd at least recommend it to new members of university EA groups, if not "most community members".

Yonatan Cale

9
0
0

This got me to leave my girlfriend and has remained a permanent way that I think:

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/627DZcvme7nLDrbZu/update-yourself-incrementally

 

I read it as part of all the sequences, no idea how helpful it will be to others or as a standalone post

DirectedEvolution

9
0
0

My take is that LessWrong is best understood as a mix of individual voices, each with their own style and concerns. The approach I'd recommend is to select one writer whose voice you find compelling, and spend some time digesting their ideas. A common refrain is "read the sequences," but that's not where I started. I like John Wentworth's writing.

Alternatively, you might find yourself interested in a particular topic. LessWrong's tags can help you both find an interesting topic and locate relevant posts, though it's not super fine grained or comprehensive.

One of the key sources of value on LessWrong is that it provides a common language for some complex ideas, presented in a relatively fun and accessible format. The combination of all those ideas can elevate thinking, although it's no panacaea. My intuition is that it's best to slowly follow your curiosity over a period of a few years, rather than trying to digest the whole thing all at once, or pick a couple highlights.

Jeremy1
0
0

Any particular Wentworth posts that stand out to you? I'd like to include some in the LCLWBC (full credit to you for the name!), but I am not too familiar.

Reply
DirectedEvolution15
0
0

John had several posts highly ranked in the 2020 LessWrong review, and one in the 2019 LessWrong review, so there's a community consensus that they're good. There was also a 2018 LessWrong review, though John didn't place there.

In general, the review is a great resource for navigating more recent LW content. Although old posts are a community touchstone, the review includes posts that reflect the live interests of community members that have also been extensively vetted not only for being exciting, but for maintaining their value a year later.

Reply
1
Jeremy
Thank you!

Eli Rose

6
0
0

I really like Ends Don't Justify Means (Among Humans) and think it's a bit underrated. (In that I don't hear people reference it much.)

I think I find the lesson generally useful: that in some cases it can be bad for me to "follow consequentialism," (because in some cases I'm an idiot) without consequentialism being itself bad.

Anthony DiGiovanni

3
0
0

The noncentral fallacy nicely categorizes a very common source of ethical disagreement in my experience.

[Edit:] Somewhat more niche, but considering how important AI risk is to many EAs, I'd also recommend Against GDP as a metric for timelines and takeoff speeds, for rebutting what is in my estimation a bizarrely common error in forecasting AI takeoff.

Comments8
Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
DirectedEvolution15
0
0

Maybe the thing to do would be to start a low-commitment LW book club? There's so many old posts that it doesn't feel fresh to comment on them, but having a way to put some group attention on a couple posts at a time might help.

Reply
Jeremy4
0
0

I made a separate post to get the ball rolling and make sure this happens. 

Reply
Vaidehi Agarwalla 🔸4
0
0

Would love to do this !

Reply
Miranda_Zhang3
0
0

Agreed - would love to participate in something like this, and would encourage other group members (esp. organizers) to as well!

Reply
Jeremy3
0
0

I'd be interested in something like this. 

Reply
Edward Tranter2
0
0

I'd also be interested in pursuing this idea! LW can definitely be overwhelming, and it'd be a fun (and useful) project to take a deep dive and perhaps produce a recommended reading list for others (broadly defined).

Reply
Jeremy1
0
0

It took me a while to get rolling, but I have done a first Less Wrong repost here and will continue weekly as long as there is enough interest. 

Reply
rileyharris1
0
0

Saved these all to pocket, thanks for the recommendations! 

Reply
More from Vaidehi Agarwalla 🔸
96
The EA Hub is retiring
2 authors
· · 1m read
22
22
206
The flow of funding in EA movement building
Vaidehi Agarwalla 🔸
· · 12m read
33
33
140
Monetary and social incentives in longtermist careers
Vaidehi Agarwalla 🔸
· · 7m read
5
5
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
This work has come out of my Undergraduate dissertation. I haven't shared or discussed these results much before putting this up.  Message me if you'd like the code :) Edit: 16th April. After helpful comments, especially from Geoffrey, I now believe this method only identifies shifts in the happiness scale (not stretches). Have edited to make this clearer. TLDR * Life satisfaction (LS) appears flat over time, despite massive economic growth — the “Easterlin Paradox.” * Some argue that happiness is rising, but we’re reporting it more conservatively — a phenomenon called rescaling. * I test rescaling using long-run German panel data, looking at whether the association between reported happiness and three “get-me-out-of-here” actions (divorce, job resignation, and hospitalisation) changes over time. * If people are getting happier (and rescaling is occuring) the probability of these actions should become less linked to reported LS — but they don’t. * I find little evidence of rescaling. We should probably take self-reported happiness scores at face value. 1. Background: The Happiness Paradox Humans today live longer, richer, and healthier lives in history — yet we seem no seem for it. Self-reported life satisfaction (LS), usually measured on a 0–10 scale, has remained remarkably flatover the last few decades, even in countries like Germany, the UK, China, and India that have experienced huge GDP growth. As Michael Plant has written, the empirical evidence for this is fairly strong. This is the Easterlin Paradox. It is a paradox, because at a point in time, income is strongly linked to happiness, as I've written on the forum before. This should feel uncomfortable for anyone who believes that economic progress should make lives better — including (me) and others in the EA/Progress Studies worlds. Assuming agree on the empirical facts (i.e., self-reported happiness isn't increasing), there are a few potential explanations: * Hedonic adaptation: as life gets
 ·  · 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
Relevant opportunities
26
Open Phil's Farm Animal Welfare team is hiring a Program Assistant!
LewisBollard
· · 2m read
0
0
15
AE Studio is hiring!
AE Studio
·
0
0
11
Manifund 2025 Regrants
Austin
·
0
0
View more