Comments
Is there a reason why organising an AI Alignment conference is not on the list? It seems to be one of the more successful things CEA has done for the EA field.
Curated and popular this week
126
TL;DR
NOVAH (No Violence At Home) was incubated by Charity Entrepreneurship (now Ambitious Impact) in 2024 to test a promising idea: preventing intimate partner violence through edutainment, in our case a serialised radio drama. Over the past two years we have produced and aired two seasons in Rwanda.
We are currently evaluating our second season through a randomized controlled trial with 2,400 couples in Rwanda in partnership wi...
TL;DR
* The Long-Term Future Fund is closing down, and EA Funds is launching the Transformative AI Fund with a new full-time team.
* The fund's primary focus is technical AI safety and AI governance (including post-AGI governance), as well as supporting fields such as field-building and forecasting. We'll also consider non-GCR implications of transformative AI such as flourishing futures and digital...
The current Long Term Future Fund (LTFF) fund managers and I have decided to step back from our work on the LTFF. Because we believe LTFF donors trusted the fund managers to ensure that the funds would be used in line with the purposes of their donation, we've decided the right move is to close the fund.
While LTFF is closing, note that EA Funds has launched a new fund...
Recent opportunities to take action
Love seeing posts like this!
At EAG-SF I asked a MATS organizer if we could get other versions of MATS, e.g. a MATS competitor at MIT. Their response was that only one of the two could survive because there are currently only ~15 people capable of doing this kind of mentorship. Mentors are the bottleneck for scaling up programs like MATS, not field builders.
Isn't Vael Gates already mostly focused on this? ("My projects tend to be aimed more at outreach and at older populations– AI researchers, academia and industry.") Curious what the main benefits are of a separate project.
See this comment: Tianxia focuses on building the longtermist community, while Concordia focuses on all things AI, including recruiting STEM undergrads and AI grad students to start working on AI safety. I think you already know this, so I'm wondering why you think it's not enough to focus on scaling up these existing orgs.
Might want to mention CAIS here?
I don't see why people need to be good at management and community building if they end up doing AIS technical research. Maybe you're using "generalists" to mean "people who will start new AIS orgs/projects"?
Ops teams can take care of some of this. AI Safety Support offers a completely free health coach for people working on AI safety. More importantly, I think an executive assistant who works exclusively for Paul Christiano would save him more time than a larger org that can't work with him as closely. MacAskill certainly has assistants, and the top alignment researchers should as well. I think your idea is to have an org that executive assistants can outsource some common tasks to?
I think the implicit assumption is that if you're someone who wants to make the "AI story go well," a necessary pre-requisite is understanding AIS in a fair amount of detail. (See e.g. this elucidation by Owen C-B). I'm not sure I believe this myself, but at the very least it sounds plausible.