dewierwan

Executive Director at Cambridge Effective Altruism CIC, a meta EA org that supports EA and EA-aligned activities in Cambridge and around the world.

Wiki Contributions

Comments

Listen to more EA content with The Nonlinear Library

Thanks for this, I've found this very helpful for consuming more EA Forum content. Are there ways to only have EA Forum posts on our podcast provider's "subscriber" feed, as opposed to LW and AF posts too? Eg I find that if I have a lot of podcast episodes in my podcast feed, I am less likely to listen to any of them, as it's harder to find the podcasts that I really want to listen to. 

 

I suspect this could look like different podcast "feed"/profile with only EA Forum posts (and maybe similarly for AF and LW posts, eg they could have their own feed/profile with only podcast episodes for posts on those platforms). 

AGI Safety Fundamentals curriculum and application

Airtable (free plan) doesn't allow the sending of confirmation emails. I've now updated the plan to the pro plan, and will send out confirmation emails to all those who have already applied. 

AGI Safety Fundamentals curriculum and application

The programme is by default virtual, we've made this clearer in the application form

A Biosecurity and Biorisk Reading+ List

Thank you for this! We've been considering starting up some kind of "intro to biosecurity" reading group at our local EA group and these are really excellent resources for us, and is likely to save us many hours of work trawlling through the literature. 

The 80,000 Hours podcast should host debates

Overall I think this sounds really cool. There are a few things I would be cautious of though. One thing I would worry about is artificially creating a sense of two distinct "sides" on an issue, when there is likely much more complexity and many more perspectives than is being presented in the debate. I think there's a recognition when only one person is being interviewed that there are many other perspectives on the issue, however, when it's a debate people seem to feel that the perspectives presented encompass the whole space.

The tendency towards side-taking also worries me. The two-party system is a classic example of this, which pushes people towards political coalitions, instead of thinking about each policy or situation independently. Some listeners may be pushed to thinking "I'm on X's side" which could have negative group polarization effects while also not necessarily promoting a holistic understanding of the issue at hand.

It could also promote a tendency towards "yes/no" questions, which I think aren't too useful for the kinds of questions we're interested in which have very complex cost/benefit tradeoffs.

However, if the debates were chaired carefully and the host tries to interject nuance, find common ground, play devil's advocate, etc., then maybe these worries could be alleviated, while also helping people to understand how different beliefs compare and relate to each other.

I'm Linch Zhang, an amateur COVID-19 forecaster and generalist EA. AMA

How important do you think it is that your or others' forecasts are more well-understood or valued among policy-makers? And if you think they should listen to forecasts more often, how do you think we should go about making them more aware?