All of Habiba Banu's Comments + Replies

Thanks so much for doing this and for sharing! I found his comments on the portofolio of the Global Fund's malaria work to be particularly interesting :)

1
tobytrem
3mo
Thank you!  And me too- I think I say this in the recording but I hadn't really thought of malaria nets in context before. 

What, if anything, would you do differently if you were starting AMF today?

Now you have a bigger team have you found that comes with much more overhead in people management, internal communications etc?

3
John Salter
4mo
If so, how did you adapt? What worked and what didn't?

On what frequency do you think about organisational goals and strategy internally? (If you're happy to share) E.g. do you set quarterly goals, think about big picture strategy annually etc

Relatedly / alternatively: In the course of running AMF have you ever struggled with worries about whether you're on the right track or doubted your choices? How have you handled this?

AMF has leveraged corporate support and partnerships perhaps more than other charities do. Does that seem true to you? If so, is it something you think lean nonprofits should be doing more?

Relatedly:

Do you think the Effective Altruism community could/should be doing more to start new projects vs funding / staffing existing projects?

Relatedly/alternatively:

What do you think of interventions that save lives in a less direct and/or less measurable way? E.g. funding research into vaccine development, strengthening health systems, policy advocacy etc?

Did you get pushback from people in the early days who questioned the usefulness of the role AMF you could play or your model of delivery? How did you handle such pushback?

2
Habiba Banu
4mo
Relatedly / alternatively: In the course of running AMF have you ever struggled with worries about whether you're on the right track or doubted your choices? How have you handled this?

In what situations does it seem like a good idea to start a new (initially small) charity rather than supporting existing efforts?

(E.g. looking at the outside at Malaria work in 2005 one might have felt like this was a huge area with a lot of attention from big global health organisations and it would be surprising if a new small organisation could be able to bring something different / useful that existing organisations couldn't)

Bit of context - I've just started a TB charity and am curious about this for TB too!

3
Habiba Banu
4mo
Relatedly: Do you think the Effective Altruism community could/should be doing more to start new projects vs funding / staffing existing projects?

What's your opinion of the other kinds of work that the Global Fund funds for malaria prevention?

(E.g. At one extreme: GF funds a sensible portfolio of activities and if you were going to spend multiple billions you couldn't do that much better. At the other extreme: The majority of malaria work could stand to be a lot more effective than it currently is - maybe even nets would be a much bigger part of the portfolio)

2
Habiba Banu
4mo
Relatedly/alternatively: What do you think of interventions that save lives in a less direct and/or less measurable way? E.g. funding research into vaccine development, strengthening health systems, policy advocacy etc?

The global health community seems to view verticalisation / silo'd provision of health services as non-ideal. (E.g. one ecosystem set up for HIV work another separate ecosystem for Malaria, another one for maternal health etc. But if you're ill you want to go to a primary care facility and get whatever it is you need.) Do you have any concerns about AMF's work being silo'd from other health work in this way?

Yes I asked some TB experts about precisely this a little while ago and I totally agree with your take: eventually there will hopefully be even better preventative measures like vaccines but they really do seem like a while off right now. So right now the WHO is keen to push on expanding access to TB preventative treatment.

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for your comment!

It wasn’t clear to me from the post whether you’re planning to do an impact evaluation of an existing government TB programme, or to trial a new kind of screening and preventive treatment programme in partnership with a government (which wouldn’t otherwise do it without you).

Apologies it wasn't clear!

Our current plan is the latter: to start a new program (in partnership with the government).

Programs like this do exist in many countries and many regions but we are hoping to show that a certain program can work well in a par... (read more)

Thanks so much for sharing this. Not following US politics closely I'd missed this. It would be so tragic if this wasn't renewed :(

I'm going to be leaving 80,000 Hours and joining Charity Entrepreneurship's incubator programme this summer!

The summer 2023 incubator round is focused on biosecurity and scalable global health charities and I'm really excited to see what's the best fit for me and hopefully launch a new charity. The ideas that the research team have written up look really exciting and I'm trepidatious about the challenge of being a founder but psyched for getting started. Watch this space! <3

I've been at 80,000 Hours for the last 3 years. I'm very proud of the 800+ advis... (read more)

3
Michael_PJ
1y
I love this!
5
Max Nadeau
1y
Best of luck with your new gig; excited to hear about it! Also, I really appreciate the honesty and specificity in this post.
3
Chris Leong
1y
Congrats for being accepted into the incubator program! Hope it goes well for you!
6
Nathan Young
1y
I've said it privately, but I say publicly also:   I am really happy that you are sticking to your principles and what you think is right and enjoyable. I can't wait to see if you found an organisation, what it's like and thank you so much for all the work you've done. 
1
David M
1y
So excited for you!

Thanks so much for making this offer Ulrik! I think it is really helpful for there to be a range of folks that people can reach out to :)

I think people's tastes may vary but I appreciated the humour in this post, thanks :)

0
Ben_West
1y
Thanks Habiba!

Thanks for writing this <3

Haha this is a great hypothetical comment! 

The concreteness is helpful because I think my take is that, in general, writing something like this is emotionally exhausting  (not to mention time consuming!) - especially so if you've got skin in the game and across your life you often come up across things like this to respond to and you keep having the pressure to force your feelings into a more acceptable format.

I reckon that crafting a message like that if I were upset about something could well take half a work day. And I'd have in my head all th... (read more)

There's an angry top-level post about evaporative cooling of group beliefs in EA that I haven't written yet, and won't until it would no longer be an angry one. That might mean that the best moment has passed, which will make me sad for not being strong enough to have competently written it earlier. You could describe this as my having been chilled out of the discourse, but I would instead describe it as my politely waiting until I am able and ready to explain my concerns in a collected and rational manner.

I am doing this because I care about carefully art... (read more)

3
RobBensinger
1y
Yep, I think it absolutely is. It's also not an accident that my version of the comment is a lot longer and covers more topics (and therefore would presumably have taken way longer for someone to write and edit in a way they personally endorsed). I don't think the minimally acceptable comment needed to be quite that long or cover quite that much ground (though I think it would be praiseworthy to do so), but directionally I'm indeed asking people to do a significantly harder thing. And I expect this to be especially hard in exactly the situations where it matters most. ❤ Yeah, that sounds all too realistic! I'm also imagining that while the author is trying to put together their comment, they might be tracking the fact that others have already rushed out their own replies (many of which probably suck from your perspective), and discussion is continuing, and the clock is ticking before the EA Forum buries this discussion entirely. (I wonder if there's a way to tweak how the EA Forum works so that there's less incentive to go super fast?) One reason I think it's worth trying to put in this extra effort is that it produces a virtuous cycle. If I take a bit longer to draft a comment I can more fully stand by, then other people will feel less pressure to rush out their own thoughts prematurely. Slowing down the discussion a little, and adding a bit more light relative to heat, can have a positive effect on all the other discussion that happens. I've mentioned NVC a few times, but I do think NVC is a good example of a thing that can help a lot at relatively little time+effort cost. Quick easy hacks are very good here, exactly because this can otherwise be such a time suck. A related hack is to put your immediate emotional reaction inside a 'this is my immediate emotional reaction' frame, and then say a few words outside that frame. Like: "Here's my immediate emotional reaction to the OP: [indented italicized text] And here are my first-pass thoughts about physi

Just a quick note to say thanks for such a thoughtful response! <3

I think you're doing a great job here modelling discourse norms and I appreciate the substance of your points! 

 

Ngl I was kinda trepidatious opening the forum... but the reasonableness of your reply and warmth of your tone is legit making me smile! (It probably doesn't hurt that happily we agree more than I realised. :P )

I may well write a litte more substantial response at some point but will likely take a weekend break :)

P.S. Real quick re social media... Things I was thinking... (read more)

Aw, that makes me really happy to hear. I'm surprised that it made such a positive difference, and I update that I should do it more!

(The warmth part, not the agreement part. I can't really control the agreement part, if we disagree then we're just fucked. 🙃😛)

Re the social media things: yeah, I stand by that stuff, though I basically always expect reasonable people to disagree a lot about exactly how big a fuck-up is, since natural language is so imprecise and there are so many background variables we could disagree on.

I feel a bit weird about the fact t... (read more)

I wanted to say a bit about the "vibe" / thrust of this comment when it comes to community discourse norms...

(This is somewhat informed by your comments on twitter / facebook which themselves are phrased more strongly than this and are less specific in scope )

I suspect you and I agree that we should generally encourage posters to be charitable in their takes and reasonable in their requests - and it would be bad overall for discussions in general where this not the case. Being angry on the internet is often not at all constructive!

However, I think that bei... (read more)

6
RobBensinger
1y
I think "charity" isn't quite the right framing here, but I think we should encourage posters to really try to understand each other; to ask themselves "what does this other person think the physical world is like, and what evidence do I have that it's not like that?"; to not exaggerate how negative their takes are; and to be mindful of biases and social dynamics that often cause people to have unrealistically negative beliefs about The Other Side. I 100% agree! I happened to write something similar here just before reading your comment. :) From my perspective, the goal is more "have accurate models" and "be honest about what your models are". In interpersonal contexts, the gold standard is often that you're able to pass someone else's ideological Turing Test. Sometimes, your model really is that something is terrible! In cases like that, I think we should be pretty cautious about discouraging people from sharing what they really think about the terrible thing. (Like, I think "be civil all the time", "don't rock the boat", "be very cautious about criticizing other EAs" is one of the main processes that got in the way of people like me hearing earlier about SBF's bad track record — I think EAs in the know kept waaay too quiet about this information.) It's true that there are real costs to encouraging EAs to routinely speak up about their criticisms — it can make the space feel more negative and aversive to a lot of people, which I'd expect to contribute to burnout and to some people feeling less comfortable honestly expressing their thoughts and feelings. I don't know what the best solution is (though I think that tech like NVC can help a whole lot), but I'd be very surprised if the best solution involved EAs never expressing actually intense feelings in any format, no matter how much the context cries for it. Sometimes shit's actually just fucked up, and I'd rather a community where people can say as much (even if not everyone agrees) than one where we're all

I see "clearly expressing anger" and "posting when angry" as quite different things.

I endorse the former, but I rarely endorse the latter, especially in contexts like the EA Forum.

Let's distinguish different stages of anger:

The "hot" kind—when one is not really thinking straight, prone to exaggeration and uncharitable interpretations, etc.

The "cool" kind—where one can think roughly as clearly about the topic as any other.

We could think of "hot" and "cold" anger as a spectrum.

Most people experience hot anger from time to time. But I think EA figures—esp... (read more)

I just wanted to chip in to say that this does indeed seem like this has been a very stressful period for the team.

I cannot read their minds but it certainly seems possible to me that part of the reason some folks could find a situation like this stressful is precisely because they felt that some of the objections and critical comments were reasonable.

The statement says in point 8 of the FAQ (my emphasis)

The way we see it, we rejected a grant proposal that deserved to be rejected, and challenging, reasonable questions have been asked as to why we initially

... (read more)
2
ChanaMessinger
1y
Strong agree with "just because something was hard for staff, doesn't necessarily mean it was hard because the critical comments were wrong/misguided.", though I think "part of the reason some folks could find a situation like this stressful is precisely because they felt that some of the objections and critical comments were reasonable" doesn't differentiate between different worlds - I think there would be a lot of flurry and frenzy and stress basically independently of reasonableness of critique (within some bounds).

Hi Rob!

Just a quick note to say I don't think everything in your comment above is entirely fair characterisation of the comments.

Two specific points (I haven't checked everything you say above, so I don't claim this is exhaustive):

  • I think you're mischaracterising Shakeel's 9.18pm response quite significantly. You paraphrased him as saying he sees no reason FLI wouldn't have released a public statement but that is I think neither the text nor the spirit of that comment. He specifically acknowledged he might be missing some reasons. He said he thinks the lac
... (read more)
3
RobBensinger
1y
Thanks for the response, Habiba. :) The comments are short enough that I should probably just quote them here: Comment 1: "The following is my personal opinion, not CEA's. If this is true it's absolutely horrifying.  FLI needs to give a full explanation of what exactly happened here and I don't understand why they haven't. If FLI did knowingly agree to give money to a neo-Nazi group, that’s despicable.  I don't think people who would do something like that ought to have any place in this community." Comment 2: "Hi Jack — reasonable question! When I wrote this post I just didn't see what the legal problems might be for FLI. With FTX, there are a ton of complications, most notably with regards to bankruptcy/clawbacks, and the fact that actual crimes were (seemingly) committed. This FLI situation, on face value, didn't seem to have any similar complications — it seemed that something deeply immoral was done, but nothing more than that. Jason's comment has made me realise there might be something else going on here, though;  if that is the case then that would make the silence make more sense. I do still think it's very weird that FLI hasn't condemned Nya Dagbladet though — CEA did, after all, make it very clear very quickly what our stance on SBF was." My summary of comment 2: "Shakeel follows up, repeating that he sees no reason why FLI wouldn't have already made a public statement, and raises the possibility that FLI has maybe done sinister questionably-legal things and that's why they haven't spoken up." I think this is a fine summary of the gist of Shakeel's comment — obviously there isn't literally "no reason" here (that would contradict the very next part of my sentence, "and raises the possibility that FLI has maybe done sinister questionably-legal things and that's why they haven't spoken up"), but there's no good reason Shakeel can see, and Shakeel reiterates that he thinks "it's very weird that FLI hasn't condemned Nya Dagbladet". The main thing I was t
1
tomrowlands
1y
Agree. Should have added those to my own comment, but felt like I'd already spent too much time on it!

Thanks for this comment :)

For what it's worth, if people want to see what Adam Rutherford himself thinks of this, he has been fairly forthright in his response on his twitter see:

https://twitter.com/AdamRutherford/status/1613534548779843588?s=20&t=3cy41nQ9L-8MvljHAn9Fog

https://twitter.com/AdamRutherford/status/1614239120552857600

Thanks for your reply. :)

For what it's worth, if people want to see what Adam Rutherford himself thinks of this, he has been fairly forthright in his response on his twitter see:

Yes, he's been very forthright in his opinion of Bostrom! But on the broader issue he has not been straightforward on Twitter, but rather has been intentionally vague (as many would in his position).

As far as I can see, there are three main issues:

  1. Are their racial IQ differences?
    1. Bostrom and Rutherford agree yes.
  2. Are these differences caused by genes?
    1. Bostrom thinks maybe yes, Rutherf
... (read more)
2
Nathan Young
2y
I really hope you referencing this: 

omg writing a comment adding another useful thing we can do = the best kind of positive feedback :P thank you! And I'm really pleased that helped!

And yes I think this is definitely another thing we try and do! It can be really helpful to have a call with someone who shares similar values with you especially when the things you're considering seem less familiar to friends / family. It's really quite a privilege to sometimes be the first person involved in the EA community that people speak to :)

I think that local EA group leaders / members can play a simila... (read more)

This is a very lovely read - the stories about EAG SF and getting the grant are so great! <3

Grateful to have a played a little role in this. Best of luck for the coming year and beyond! :)

2
BrianTan
3y
Thanks Habiba! :)