Project Idea: 'Cost to save a life' interactive calculator promotion

I see in the paper you mention a possible follow-up being " a friendlier online platform with sliders and buttons to select and tweak the scenarios users want to visualise"

This seems like it would be interesting and helpful to me and something I'd want to try to help out with, but I don't want to overlap this if you're already working on it.

I don't think the Jupyter Notebook as currently linked and hosted is interactive, at least not without some additional user setup.

Hey, one thing I could consider: vibe coding is a version of this that is more interactive, perhaps functioning as some sort of dashboard. Would this be helpful?

(These sorts of things):

https://unjournal.github.io/cm_pq_modeling/ https://uj-ai-wealth-philanthropy-steelman.netlify.app/

Some clarification questions (which I hope will help people preparing these applications).

1. For standard grants ($100k-$1m), you say next steps "may include follow-up questions or a direct decision." Roughly how much of the decision do you expect to depend on the EoI text itself? I'd find find it useful to know how much of the case for credibility and theory of change (etc.) needs to fit in 2,000 characters, versus how much can be introduced at a later stage (if one gets there).

2. Relatedly, is there a mechanism to link to supporting material (a longer scope note a more detailed budget, prior work, etc.), or would you rather it all fits in the 2k character limit?

3. Your AI governance RFP said the EoI stage focuses mainly on the first three assessment criteria (ToC, track record, strategic judgment), with the rest covered at full review. Is there an analogous shortlist here (going beyond the ITN framework mentioned)?

Yikes, something is wrong here -- I now put it to 50 and it says 0? I'll ask the forum moderators

Quick follow-up: I've worked with Claude Code (several iterations; wanted Fable, got blocked so pushed to Opus) to put up this page comparing and bridging Pablo's model to ours...

• where and how the two overlap and differ
• a simplified calculator that feeds a cost/kg into a stripped-down version of the cost→share logic.

This is early -- I continue vetting and working on it and would love your feedback

There's a potential complementarity: we focus on is the cost distribution, Pablo on the demand response is Pablo's

(If you add hypothes.is comments there I'll respond and adapt.)

Thanks for this! We've been doing some related work through The Unjournal Pivotal questions -- see this modeling interface/calculator. I'm reading through your modeling and discussion carefully now, aiming to do some comparisons between our approaches, and it might be worth some conversation/collaboration (feel free to DM).

Also see the resources and evidence coming out of our recent workshop, which we're following up on, aiming to get a wider range of views and a productive crux-mappiung conversation between 'skeptics and optimists'. We plan to share further synthesis of stated beliefs as it comes together.

(Also see the how it works explainer and the TEA comparisons. Much/most of these were AI generated with repeated feedback, and may benefit from further human scrutiny.

Wait back to 50% because it says “end factory farming” rather than “ substantially reduce factory farming”

I voted 25% aka alt proteins more likely. Not sure what happened w the interface

Intuition that moral norms are hard to change with personal interests and tastes and culture being very much in the opposite direction. Yes, we have seen changes in these moral norms towards LGBT, racism etc, but animals can't speak for themselves in the same way