All of ezrah's Comments + Replies

This seems great!

I was wondering about how your ROI or "adjusted money raised" translates to other GH metrics, such as GW's "multiples of cash".

If an EGI in OP's portfolio has a average of 6x adjusted return on donation, and assuming the average GW top charity is around 10x as cost effective as direct cash transfers - does that mean you believe an EGI is equivalent in cost-effectiveness to 60x cash? Or is there a downward adjustment that needs to be made when cross-comparing metrics? Would love to hear your thoughts
 

5
Melanie Basnak🔸
Hi Ezra, Thanks for your question! As a first pass, your assumption is correct in that, since our 1x benchmark is against GW charities (and charities of similar expected cost-effectiveness), an adjusted ROI of 6x is in expectation ~60x cash. That being said, we think the real number is likely lower than that, which is why we hold our EG grantees to a bar of at least 2x (and higher for more established efforts). Specifically, we think a 2x multiplier bar seems justified because (i) "meta" funding opportunities that are more distant from impact seem more likely to overestimate cost-effectiveness by failing to adequately account for additional efforts required by other actors to achieve impact, and (ii) intuitively, we aren't excited about supporting opportunities that could spend an additional $1 to generate only slightly more than that for high impact charities, even after a counterfactual adjustment. Supporting these opportunities would mean small errors in our calculations could result in negative impact, and risks falling into a meta-trap.
ezrah
18
3
1
2

Speculation only:

It seems plausible to me that the value of funding "Abundance and Growth" in the USA is not measured in QALYs, but in supporting a political alternative to Trump and MAGA. The "center-left" vibes might not be a bug, but a feature.

If you think USAID cuts are important, and AI is important, and that Trump is net-negative on both of these, maybe the most impactful thing you can do is support alternative narratives to Trumpism and help ensure he doesn't get re-elected and that you swing the house as far as possible. Of course, it needs sound b... (read more)

4
Ozzie Gooen
I'd flag that Dustin Moskovitz is a top Democratic donor. He certainly doesn't seem to have a problem directly donating to support Democrats. So I don't see a need to donate to Abundance as a way to counter Trump while being bi-partisan.  That said, I know that Abundance-proponents do consider it as an area that has wide-ranging positive effects. So while "reducing political extremism" might not be the only purpose, I wouldn't be surprised if it was part of the pie.   https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Dustin+Moskovitz

Love this.

I think there's a meme that high impact careers goes something like: "learn about EA -> get involved in EA -> get a high impact job", while for many (most?) people the trajectory is more like "learn about EA -> get involved in EA -> work in something unrelated to EA and feel disillusioned".

Your post hopefully helps fix this misunderstanding. 

2
Jeroen Willems🔸
Yeah, and even when finding a classic EA "high impact job" doesn't work, finding a good E2G job may not work either. And you may not find the time to volunteer. It sucks, but you just try with what you have and what you can. This will be different for everybody. It may require a lot of self-forgiveness. I sure struggle(d) with it. But this is different from completely giving up on having an impact! 

When is the survey going to be open until? Asking as a group organizer who is planning how to get members to fill in the survey

4
David_Moss
Thanks for asking ezrah. We currently plan to leave the survey open until December 31st, though it’s possible we might extend the window, as we did last time. 

Animal welfare is just so much more neglected, relative to the scale.

However, I don't go all the way to a strong agree since I think the evidence base is weaker and am less certain of finding good interventions; along with a stronger sense of moral responsibility towards humans; along with a bigger "sentience discount" than other moral comparisons between humans and non-human animals.

What types of influence do you think governments from small, low influence countries will be able to have?

For example, the NZ government - aren't they price-takers when it comes to AI regulation? If you're not a significant player, don't have significant resources to commit to the problem, and don't have any national GenAI companies - how will they influence the development trajectory of AI?

My sense is that what's happening here is that small countries have more cohesive communities, and therefore a larger % of the EA community answers the survey.

I don't think one can infer that without having the whole distribution across different countries. It may just be that small countries have greater variance. (Though I don't know what principle the author used for excluding certain countries.)

Inspiring and touching, thank you for sharing

Wishing you both the best of health going forward

2
Elizabeth Klugh
Thank you, Ezrah! The first few weeks were ROUGH, but I'm healing well. It's about Week 8 now and I'm mostly better. I'm still regaining my stamina and strength, but most days, I don't even remember that I'm missing an organ. In fact, my husband and I are taking a week-long hiking and camping trip right now. I'm slow, but can go for a few miles already!

Edit: it seems like this already exists! @Aaron Bergman can you confirm?

Can someone who runs an EA podcast please convert recorded EAG talks to podcast form, so that more people can listen to them? @80000_Hours @hearthisidea @Kat Woods @EA Global (please tag other podcasters in the comments)

The CEA events team seem open to this, but don't have the podcasting expertise or the bandwidth to start a new podcast


(Full disclosure - this is a bit of a selfish ask, I'm attending EAG and want to listen to quite a few talks that I don't have time for, and streaming t... (read more)

5
Aaron Bergman
Yes!  * Spotify * Apple Podcasts * RSS: https://anchor.fm/s/e2a05734/podcast/rss 
3
Peter
This exists here but I haven't updated it in about a year. If someone wants to take it over or automate it that could be good: EA Talks (formerly EARadio)
9
MvK🔸
This is a great idea. It's such a good idea that someone else (https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/users/aaronb50) has had it before and has already solved this problem for us: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/eag-talks/id1689845820

Thanks Ollie, makes a lot of sense

Very cool! Good luck!

Can I ask why you chose to run a summit, instead of an EAGxBrazil? 

6
OllieBase
Jumping in here: this event is intended as a test for whether an EAGx in Brazil might make sense in future. EAGx events are usually larger, and CEA are more involved in supporting the teams, so we decided to distinguish this from an EAGx by using a different name for this event. (I approved the grant from CEA for this event).
1
Toby Tremlett🔹
Thank you!

Very interesting!

Thanks for the writeup

I'd be very interested in seeing a continuation in regards to outcomes (maybe career changes could be a proxy for impact?)

Also, curious how you would think about the added value of a career call or participation in a program? Given that a person made a career change, obviously the career call with 80k isn't 100% responsible for the change, but probably not 0% either (if the call was successful). 

2
Vasco Grilo🔸
Thanks for the comment, Ezrah! Yes, I think career changes and additional effective donations would be better proxies for impact than outputs like quality-adjusted attendances and calls. Relatedly: ---------------------------------------- AAC's studies had a control group, so they provide evidence about the counterfactual impact of their one-to-one advising calls and online course. 80,000 Hours' has a metric called discounted impact-adjusted peak years (DIPYs) which accounts for which fraction of the career change was caused by them.

Please advertise applications at least 4 weeks before closing! (more for fellowships!)

I've seen a lot of cool job postings, fellowships, or other opportunities that post that applications are open the forum or on 80k ~10 days before closing. 

Because many EA roles or opportunities often get cross-posted to other platforms or newsletters, and there's a built in lag-time between the original post and the secondary platform, this is especially relevant to EA. For fellowships or similar training programs, where so much work has gone into planning and desig... (read more)

2
OllieBase
As someone guilty of this—sorry! This is a good reminder.
1
ElliotTep
+1 as the person who writes the EA Australia newsletter

Rashi on "categories of labor" - although some learners of the EA Talmud have been known to  include commenting on forums and debating philosophical turns of phrase within their definition of "labor", the Mishna is making a chiddush and excluding types of "labor" that cannot be of assistance when building a large tent. Nafka mina (emerges from it) the understanding that how-to youtube videos would be categorized as labor, by a rabbinical - not biblical - decree, but longwinded comments on obscure posts are not.

Great question! I realize that I really wasn't clear, and that it probably does exist more in EA than my instinctive impression (also - great links, I hadn't been familiar with all of them).

What I meant by leverage was more along the lines of "the value of insider's perspective and the ability to leverage individual networks and skill sets". In these cases, Nick was able to identify potential cost-effective ways to save lives because of both his training and location, and SACH is able to similarly have a cost-effective program because of their close connec... (read more)

From what I understand, the per-patient treatments costs are both quite low and are given pro-bono, so given how GiveWell understands leverage (which @Mo Putera pointed out in the response below), they should be strongly discounted from the costs. The question of how to incorporate the infrastructure costs, ie - the hospital, staff training, etc - that enable the program to operate, is quite interesting, and I honestly don't have a great idea how that fits into the model.

Loved this post. Like sawyer wrote - it made me emotional and made me think, and feels like a great example of what EA should be.

There actually is a non-profit I'm aware of (no affiliation) that hits a lot of the criteria mentioned in the comments - https://saveachildsheart.org/, they treat life-threatening heart disease in developing countries, often by paying for transportation to Israel where the children receive pro-bono treatment from a hospital the nonprofit has a partnership with. From a (very) quick look at their financial statements and annual rep... (read more)

6
Jason
Could you say a bit more about the ~$6,300 figure? I have 547 lives saved from the annual report (p. 5) and about $9.5MM USD in expenses from the financial statements. Admittedly, most of this is related to the establishment of a "Children's Hospital at Wolfson" -- but it's not clear to me that these costs should be excluded. I suppose that the organization is doing its current work without said hospital existing yet, but the presence and magnitude of that expenditure makes me wonder -- at a minimum -- whether they have room for more funding at ~$6,300. By rough analogy, it wouldn't be appropriate for an organization to fundraise separately for bednets and for distribution costs, and quote a cost-effectiveness figure to distribution-cost donors of (distribution costs / total impact).
1
gewind
Thanks for this source, ezrah! These 6,3k seem to possibly be a bit misleading to me. Without taking a closer look, it sounds like the costs of the treatment (currently covered by the hospital's CSR funds or donations?) are hidden from the total costs as someone had the great idea of splitting the true costs into two different donation opportunities, both of which on each side suggest that "if you give to this opportunity, the other side is covered". But given the high-quality medical facility/treatment the children receive, the true cost of donations consumed per patient are probably much higher. Am I mistaken here?
1
Mo Putera
I'd be curious as to what you mean here, since my impression was always that EA discourse heavily emphasises leverage – e.g. in the SPC framework for cause prioritisation, in career advice by 80,000 Hours and Probably Good, in GiveWell's reasoning (for instance here is how GW's spreadsheet adjusts for leverage in evaluating AMF). 
ezrah
14
6
0
2

To everyone who replied with messages of support and wishes for a better world - thank you, I'm really glad that the EA community has people such as you, especially in such difficult times.

From what I've seen, peace building initiatives are more a matter of taste than proven effectiveness.

And I would wait until after the war to understand which orgs are able to effectively deliver aid to Gazans who have been affected, things will be clearer then. Now everything is complicated by the political / military situation.

Hi Ofer

Thanks for responding.

I agree with all of the facts you present in your comment! and I don't at all think that the Israeli government is trustworthy or is trying to maximise general wellbeing, and I think that they, like most sovereign countries, value the lives of their citizens and soldiers significantly more than civilians on the other side. I don't know if that's good for the world, but it is how governments operate. I do think that there is effort being made to minimise civilian causalities, but I have no idea how much.

The point I was trying to... (read more)

Hi!

From what I understand from conversations with SmokeFree Israel's staff (which admittedly might be biased) is that they were the only body pushing the legislation forward, and they had to work AGAINST the existing legislation. SFI wokred to fix problematic loopholes in the update to the tobacco taxation policy that had recently been passed, and petitioned to external legal bodies to help force the government to put the policy back on the agenda. They also provided the data and expert opinions that were pivotal in the discussions within the legislature o... (read more)

To emphasize Cornelis's point:

I've noticed that most of the tension that a "cause-first" model has is that it's "cause" in the singular, and not "causes" (ie - people who join EA because of GHWB and Animal Welfare but then discover that at EAG everyone is only talking about AI). Marcus claims that EA's success is based on cause-first, and brings examples:

"The EA community was at the forefront of pushing AI safety to the mainstream. It has started several new charities. It's responsible for a lot of wins for animals. It's responsible for saving hundreds of ... (read more)

5
Cornelis Dirk Haupt
I'd like to note that it is totally possible for someone to sincerely be talking about "cause-first EA" and simultaneously believe longtermism and AI safety should be the cause EA should prioritize. As a community organizer I've lost track of how many times people I've introduced to EA initially get excited, but then disappointed that all we seem to talk about are effective charities and animals instead of... mental health or political action or climate change or world war 3 or <insert favourite cause here>. And when this happens I try to take a member-first approach and ensure they understand what led to these priorities so that the new member can be armed to either change their own mind or argue with us or apply EA principles in their own work regardless of where it makes sense to do so. A member-first approach wouldn't ensure we have diversity of causes. We could in theory have a very members-first movement that only prioritizes AI Alignment. This is totally possible. The difference is that a members-first AI alignment focused movement would focus on ensuring its members properly understand cause agnostic EA principles - something they can derive value from regardless of their ability to contribute to AI Alignment - and based on that understand why AI Alignment just happens to be the thing the community mostly talks about at this point in time. Our current cause-first approach is less concerned with teaching EA principles that are cause agnostic and more concerned with just getting skilled people of any kind, whether they care about EA principles or not, to work on AI Alignment or other important things. Teaching EA principles being mostly instrumental to said end goal. I believe this is more the cause of the tension you describe in the "cause-first" model. It has less to do with only one cause being focused on. It has more to do with the fact that humans are tribalistic. If you're not going to put effort into making sure someone new is part of the tribe (i

Great post, I'm glad this is up for debate. 

I'm mostly worried about situations where the majority of the board is made up of different representatives of a single funder / donor. For the example of Claire - I think it's fine that she represents OP interests to CEA. I'm more worried when the other board members and executives are also very strongly OP affiliated - then it seems like the nonprofits ability to carry out it's mission is harmed. If a nonprofit has an appearance of independence but in practice is managed / owned by a different organization... (read more)

Excellent post, and great work on the research report!

From a narrative perspective I think the analogy between Clean Water and Clean Air is great. However, I'm wondering if from a R&D and implementation perspective a more fitting analogy would be clean cooking fuel, heating or solar power (which you do mention). Clean water systems need large investment in infrastructure and government implementation upfront, as much as they need more technological advancement, since Clean Water is a public good. Indoor Clean Air, or at least the solutions you describe... (read more)

Love this idea as a new format for university groups! Let's not just focus broadly on undergrads, but get people who already have specific skills and expertise to think deeply about their chosen field.

7
NoamShwartz
Hopefully soon!

Wishing you best of luck Markus!

As one of the people who Markus worked with during the pilot phase, I can very much attest to the value he brings to an organization, and would be happy to speak with any potential funders about my experience working with Altruistic Agency.

2
Markus Amalthea Magnuson
Thank you, Ezra, that is very kind of you.

Hi!

Great post, thanks for writing. I also found your previous post on hiring also very helpful. I'd be very interested in a syllabus of key concepts and materials. Even something low-effort (ie - a google doc with a list of terms/concepts to google and a list of general materials) would be useful. Please let me know if there's anything I could do to make this move forward. Thanks!

Great points, very much liked your directness.