Dušan D. Nešić (Dushan)

Director of Operations @ PIBBSS
Working (6-15 years of experience)
140Joined May 2022

Bio

Participation
4

Director of Operations in PIBBSS, professor of Finance and Economics, trainer of Confidence and Public Speech, and corporate coach for Team Skills and Leadership. Consultant and Entrepreneur, with experience in Asia and Europe, especially China. I have a long history of working in charity but was always bothered by the ineffectiveness, and EA is exactly what I was looking for all this time. I developed charities in China where this was extremely difficult, growing clubs from 0 to 100 and helping clubs open in new cities and universities, doing community building with 0 funds.

My current meme to spread is that EA needs more outreach to existing Charity organizations.

How others can help me

I am interested in ways in which I can combine as much of my past knowledge into a useful bundle for an EA-aligned organization. My personal interests also lie in EA Infrastructure growth, helping scale EA through partnerships with existing organizations and collecting recruits from them.

How I can help others

If any of my previous experiences sound useful to you, reach out - whether you want to develop them or utilize them. My LinkedIn profile might give a bit more of a glimpse into the more formal experiences I had, but the main skills are presented in the bio here already.

Sequences
1

Learning what we can from Non-EA Altruist Organizations

Comments
22

A stronger, more deliberate push (backed by funding) should be made to enter professional places (by opening professional groups) and attract mid-to-late-stage professionals from diverse industries, as well as people in countries where EA has no presence. A lesser imperative should be placed on university groups.

More outside expertise should be welcomed. All roles in EA organizations should be advertised on open platforms like LinkedIn, and while selecting based on "culture fit" is allowed, people without previous EA exposure should not be disqualified outright. 

There should be a separate body to represent communities which is a combination of elected and randomly assigned members. Its purpose is to have a check on the un-elected experts in other organizations while being kept in check by them in turn.

Many EA organizations currently make decisions based on a western-centric (for lack of a better word) mindset, accidentally silencing voices coming from outside. More EAGs/job opportunities should be held outside of USA/UK/EU since third-world countries have a hard time getting a Visa for developed countries.

"All" feels like too strong of a claim, but I could agree with a weaker version of this.

Apologies for the late reply. To use an analogy: anyone can make a burger better than Mcdonalds', but hardly anyone can make an organization as successful. If you could for example organize international trade, steel mining or such while avoiding corporations, I would be indeed impressed. In the reality that we live in, this is the only way to conduct business.

Thank you for the great work - I wonder which other fields might benefit from the same treatment (all of them?).

One note: you mark "built environment" as low downside risk. Is this true? I'd assume that a constant low-level exposure to pathogens is what builds up our immune systems (perhaps why allergies and asthma levels are rising is our increasingly disinfected environments?) so I'd assume that built environments (which I presume mean those with controlled air-flow and sealed from the outside) actually do carry possible significant downside risks through weakening immune systems.

I am not an expert and hold this opinion weakly, just wanted to learn more :)

 

Edit: likewise for "drills and online classes" - we have seen it has a mental impact on children when they do shooter drills, and that online classes have costs in the socializing of children. Perhaps we do not mean the same when we say "low downside risk"?

I am speaking from my opinion and the conversations I had face-to-face with EA's in different situations but this seems broadly true:

  • Corporations are a necessary evil: generally much of the harm that is imposed on animals for example comes from monopolies, MNCs and such; tax evasion and exploitation of labor is conducted by the largest companies; Biorisk and AI risk comes from corporations as well as governments. There is however no other way to conduct business, and they bring about benefits such as technological development.

I wonder if that may be what AI becomes for a while, before escaping control. I personally do see corporate control (corporate governance, as well as govt. or international control over corporations) as a viable EA cause area and am willing to explore it if someone wants to do it with me.

Thank you very much for writing this - I have found it incredibly useful and wish all complex philosophical texts would be followed by something like this. Just wanted to give you extra feel-good for doing this because it is well deserved as it helped me immensely to fit all that I read into place.

Thank you Geoffrey for an insightful contribution!

Regarding B - The project PIBBSS has done over the last fellowship (disclosure I now work there as Ops Director) has exactly this goal in mind, and we are keen to connect to non-AI researchers interested in doing AI safety research by utilizing their diverse professions. Do point them our way and tell them that the interdisciplinary field is in development. The fellowship is not open yet, and we are considering how to go forward, but there will likely be speaker series that would be relevant to these people.

Load More