Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by ProbablyGoodCouple
4 min read 0

49

Career choiceApril Fools' Day
Personal Blog

Summary

  • This is a summary of the post, but it’s not like that matters to you as an overanxious job seeker because you’ll just meticulously spend 3hrs reading the whole post several times.
     
  • Definitely spend too long thinking about the pros and cons of applying to every opportunity (e.g., all jobs, grants, degree programs, or internships). Assume the initial application will take you a lot of time, and they probably think you suck anyways, so you’re probably just wasting everyone’s time, so why bother?
     
  • If you somehow end up applying to stuff and have to choose whether to take it, you’ve already messed up, but we suggest multiple techniques to get you back on track to not actually making a decision in any reasonable amount of time.
     

Never apply to things!

If someone wants to test their fit for a given line of work or build their career capital, our key recommendation is to never apply to anything so that you never actually get a chance to test your fit. Remember that you’re only a failure if you actually get rejected from a job offer, and you can always maintain a self-image of being successful if you just never apply to anything. Why shatter this self-image?

Rather than apply, just spin your wheels endlessly reading up on an area, doing independent projects, taking little courses, etc! These things can easily take years, and everyone else you’d be competing against has already spent approximately thirty years reading everything there is to read on every subject, so it’s hopeless to apply to anything if you haven’t already done this, so why bother?

Also, recall that applications are just black box processes where there will be absolutely no relevant learning about yourself or the wider world of opportunities. And if you’re rejected once, that likely means you’ll be rejected from everything, so you should just stop right there.


How many things should I apply to, and how much time should I spend thinking?

Our rough suggestion is to:

  1. Apply for something like 0 opportunities per year when actively seeking work
  2. Apply for something like 0 opportunities per year even when planning to not leave your current role
    • Since 0 of those 0 things might turn out, on further reflection, to be worth changing your plans for, and/or you might learn a lot from applying or be able to defer an offer

       

How do I decide between multiple options?

Let’s say you do end up getting a job offer somehow, despite never applying to anything.

So now you’re asking – how do you decide whether to take it? Or how to decide between multiple options?

At this point, more analysis will be needed, such as doing a PhD-level 150-page paper about whether or not to do a PhD.

First, we recommend interviewing at least 40 people and just asking them “What should I do?” with no additional detail. While interviewing these 40 people, it’s often good to imagine their lives and what they would do in your situation. In fact, keep imagining their lives and just don’t stop, so you no longer have to experience what it is like to be you. This is often better.

Throughout this process, you should track where your preferences go over time, and always oscillate between 51% and 49% at an exact average rate. Another key thing you can do here is ask your current boss to make the decision for you but when she says “but it’s a life decision, you make this decision!”, just quit on the spot.
 

Decision matrix

Some people suggest using a decision matrix here to clarify your options. We suggest creating such a matrix with different factors, but be sure to change the weight of different factors so that all your options achieve exactly the same score, and thus you can continue to agonize over your options endlessly.

Also when designing the decision matrix, make sure to never take into account any personal factors, because you’re focused on IMPACT! Who cares if you’re depressed for the first two years of your new role?
 

WRAP method

A more specific method to use is the WRAP method from the book Decisive by Chip and Dan Heath. This method has the steps: (1) Widen Your Options, (2) Reality-Test Your Assumptions, (3) Attain Distance Before Deciding, and (4) Prepare to be Wrong.

Here’s our advice on the implications of each step:

  • Widen your options: Are you sure you’ve considered the full range of options? Is it worth trying to get a job when you could be trying to hang out with the heads of various AGI labs and aim to marry them?
     
  • Reality test your assumptions: This step can often just be skipped, in favor of more overthinking. Never try to actually do the thing that you would do in the new role and instead always analyze only from first principles.
  • Attain distance before deciding: This of course refers to literal physical distance, so you should calculate the geographic midpoint of the offices of the organizations giving you job offers and then aim to get at least 3000 miles away from that midpoint. We especially recommend going deep into a forest and never returning.
  • Prepare to be wrong: This point is obvious because you will be wrong.
     

Most people at this point just WRAP themselves in blankets and play a little WRAP battle in their heads between Stuart Russell and Yann LeCun about AI timelines (see appendix) while eating a lot of WRAPs obsessively.

The remainder of this process is to agonize over your options over several months, change your minds every day, then make a decision on a whim in the middle of the night after having a nightmare about making the least optimal decision.

After all, recall that we’re optimizing for literally the “best decision possible” - it’s a totally achievable goal! And doing anything less than the best decision possible means you’re literally happy with killing people. And you wouldn’t want that, would you?

This is why the best thing to do is just not apply in the first place. It’s a lot of stress, so just don’t bother.

49

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments


No comments on this post yet.
Be the first to respond.
More from ProbablyGoodCouple
243
The EA Relationship Escalator
ProbablyGoodCouple
· · 2m read
7
7
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
[Cross-posted from my Substack here] If you spend time with people trying to change the world, you’ll come to an interesting conundrum: Various advocacy groups reference previous successful social movements as to why their chosen strategy is the most important one. Yet, these groups often follow wildly different strategies from each other to achieve social change. So, which one of them is right? The answer is all of them and none of them. This is because many people use research and historical movements to justify their pre-existing beliefs about how social change happens. Simply, you can find a case study to fit most plausible theories of how social change happens. For example, the groups might say: * Repeated nonviolent disruption is the key to social change, citing the Freedom Riders from the civil rights Movement or Act Up! from the gay rights movement. * Technological progress is what drives improvements in the human condition if you consider the development of the contraceptive pill funded by Katharine McCormick. * Organising and base-building is how change happens, as inspired by Ella Baker, the NAACP or Cesar Chavez from the United Workers Movement. * Insider advocacy is the real secret of social movements – look no further than how influential the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights was in passing the Civil Rights Acts of 1960 & 1964. * Democratic participation is the backbone of social change – just look at how Ireland lifted a ban on abortion via a Citizen’s Assembly. * And so on… To paint this picture, we can see this in action below: Source: Just Stop Oil which focuses on…civil resistance and disruption Source: The Civic Power Fund which focuses on… local organising What do we take away from all this? In my mind, a few key things: 1. Many different approaches have worked in changing the world so we should be humble and not assume we are doing The Most Important Thing 2. The case studies we focus on are likely confirmation bias, where
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
I speak to many entrepreneurial people trying to do a large amount of good by starting a nonprofit organisation. I think this is often an error for four main reasons. 1. Scalability 2. Capital counterfactuals 3. Standards 4. Learning potential 5. Earning to give potential These arguments are most applicable to starting high-growth organisations, such as startups.[1] Scalability There is a lot of capital available for startups, and established mechanisms exist to continue raising funds if the ROI appears high. It seems extremely difficult to operate a nonprofit with a budget of more than $30M per year (e.g., with approximately 150 people), but this is not particularly unusual for for-profit organisations. Capital Counterfactuals I generally believe that value-aligned funders are spending their money reasonably well, while for-profit investors are spending theirs extremely poorly (on altruistic grounds). If you can redirect that funding towards high-altruism value work, you could potentially create a much larger delta between your use of funding and the counterfactual of someone else receiving those funds. You also won’t be reliant on constantly convincing donors to give you money, once you’re generating revenue. Standards Nonprofits have significantly weaker feedback mechanisms compared to for-profits. They are often difficult to evaluate and lack a natural kill function. Few people are going to complain that you provided bad service when it didn’t cost them anything. Most nonprofits are not very ambitious, despite having large moral ambitions. It’s challenging to find talented people willing to accept a substantial pay cut to work with you. For-profits are considerably more likely to create something that people actually want. Learning Potential Most people should be trying to put themselves in a better position to do useful work later on. People often report learning a great deal from working at high-growth companies, building interesting connection
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
Need help planning your career? Probably Good’s 1-1 advising service is back! After refining our approach and expanding our capacity, we’re excited to once again offer personal advising sessions to help people figure out how to build careers that are good for them and for the world. Our advising is open to people at all career stages who want to have a positive impact across a range of cause areas—whether you're early in your career, looking to make a transition, or facing uncertainty about your next steps. Some applicants come in with specific plans they want feedback on, while others are just beginning to explore what impactful careers could look like for them. Either way, we aim to provide useful guidance tailored to your situation. Learn more about our advising program and apply here. Also, if you know someone who might benefit from an advising call, we’d really appreciate you passing this along. Looking forward to hearing from those interested. Feel free to get in touch if you have any questions. Finally, we wanted to say a big thank you to 80,000 Hours for their help! The input that they gave us, both now and earlier in the process, was instrumental in shaping what our advising program will look like, and we really appreciate their support.
Recent opportunities in Career choice
97
E2G help available
Will Kirkpatrick
· · 3m read
3
3
45
The CEA Events Team is Hiring for Three Program Lead Positions
OllieBase
· · 3m read
0
0
50
$100 million dollar grant funding opportunity for EA
Jack Kelly
· · 3m read
1
1
View more