F

Francis

107 karmaJoined Oct 2021

Posts
4

Sorted by New
2
· 5mo ago · 1m read

Comments
7

Francis
5moModerator Comment11
3
8

Posting highly sensitive personal information, such as street addresses, is not allowed on the Forum. Although this is the address of an organization's campus, rather than a specific individual, it can nonetheless pose a risk to those using the campus.

I'm also confused about this. I found a paper[1] that estimates the annual amount of shrimp paste produced in China at 40,000 tons, and says that China is the largest shrimp paste producer in the world. The spreadsheet states that ~251,093 tons of A. japonicus were caught in the wild in 2020, so depending on what proportion of shrimp paste is produced in China[2] and how many tons of shrimp are needed to make one ton of shrimp paste, this could be accurate?

  1. ^

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0023643822010313
    I have low confidence in this estimate because I looked at the paper it's citing and don't see that number anywhere in there.

  2. ^

    I did a cursory search for information about shrimp paste production in other countries and couldn't find any numbers, but I didn't look very hard and it's possible you could find more accurate information.

PEPFAR, a US program which funds HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment in the developing world, is in danger of not being reauthorized.[1] (The deadline is September 30th, although my current understanding is that even if the House of Representatives misses the deadline, it could still be reauthorized, there would just be a delay in funding.) Over the course of its existence, it's estimated as saving ~25 million lives[2] for a little over $100 billion, and my current understanding is that (even if the lives saved number is an overestimate) it's one of the most cost-effective things the US government does.

I think it might be worth calling your representative to encourage them to reauthorize PEPFAR, particularly if they've indicated that they're uncertain of how to vote or might vote against it. My main uncertainty here is that I'm not sure how likely calling your representative is to actually change their mind, but I suspect this is fairly tractable compared to most forms of lobbying since it's literally just asking them to reauthorize a program that already exists (as opposed to asking them to pass a new law, majorly change how a program works, etc.)

  1. ^

    https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/05/president-emergency-global-aids-program-00113796

  2. ^

    https://www.state.gov/pepfar/ (note that some sources think this is an overestimate - e.g. the comments section here thinks it could be more like 6 million as a low estimate, which would make it not competitive with GiveWell top charities, though still way more cost-effective than a lot of things the US government does (and I currently don't expect that if the program were eliminated the money would be redirected to something more cost effective))

Hi Jacob! This report mentioned a couple of times that consumers don't necessarily believe plant-based meats are taste-competitive with animal meats, even if they are specifically instructed to consider situations where they are. Do you know if there's any research into whether "taste tests" of theoretically-taste-competitive plant-based meats increase subsequent demand for plant-based meats (and/or decrease subsequent demand for animal-based meats) for participants in the taste tests?

Thanks Oscar! I really appreciate you catching that. I've revised the post to reflect the more accurate statistics.

With regards to your question, the sources I found seemed to mostly describe adsorption as a relatively simple process -- e.g. Nicomel et. al. specifically highlighted "easy operation and handling" as a major advantage of adsorption (and gave that as a reason for why it has been commonly used in the past).

Rules clarification: are current undergraduate students who will be graduating prior to the June 15th deadline eligible, provided that they submit their essay before they graduate?

Hi Jackson! I chose to set this story in an (admittedly very science-fictional) future civilization for a couple of reasons:

  1. I was trying to write a story that a random person with no familiarity would find interesting enough to actually read. I think most people would be pretty unlikely to read a story if it were billed as "two people talk about their jobs," and much more likely to read a story about a spaceship pilot.
  2. Part of the point of the story is that the analytic frameworks of effective altruism aren't just applicable to our time period, but can (at least in theory) be applied anywhere with the opportunity to do good.