All of inconvenient's Comments + Replies
Have you asked GPI and FHI's macrostrategy team whether they have suggestions for kinds of prioritization research (if any) that you could usefully do? This is a difficult kind of research to do, and LEAN/SHIC/Peter don't have a track record of generating important prioritization considerations in the same way as these other organizations.
The criteria I used for making these grants was as follows: (1) Have clear “room for more funding” ... (2) Have a clear risk of not meeting their funding goal... (3) Clear a bar of being “impactful enough”...represent outstanding opportunities that I think are better than the community average
...I am very uninformed about organizations... working on existential risk and far future. My impression, however, is that OpenPhil has done a good job filling up the funding gaps in this area and that there are very few organizations that would meet the criteria I’m
The problem is that some EAs would have the amount of life in the universe reduced to zero permanently. (And don't downvote this unless you personally know this to be false - it is unfortunately true)
If not, then it it is a necessary example, plain and simple.
But it is not necessary - as you can see elsewhere in this thread, I raised an issue without providing an example at all.
"An issue"? Austen was referring to problems where an organization affiliates with particular organizations that cause terror risk, which you don't seem to have d...
He wrote a single sentence pointing out that the parent comment was giving FRI an unfair and unnecessary treatment. I don't see what's "ill founded" about that.
What's ill-founded is that if you want to point out a problem where people affiliate with NU orgs that promote values which increase risk of terror, then it's obviously necessary to name the orgs. Calling it "unnecessary" to treat that org is then a blatant non-sequitur, whether you call it an argument or an assertion is up to you.
...Why is it more important now than in normal
Exactly, despite the upvotes, Soeren's argument is ill-founded. It seems really important in situations like this that people vote on what they believe to be true based on reason and evidence, not based on uninformed guesses and motivated reasoning.
I really don't like how you are accusing people without evidence of intentionally promoting violence. This is borderline libel. I agree that someone could take their ideology and use it to justify violence, but I see no reason to believe that they are intentionally trying to "entice" such actions.
Indeed, must focus on the battles we can win. There are two traps. One is to make false accusations. Currently, few negative utilitarians are promoting terrorism, and we should not make accusations that would suggest otherwise. Two is to stir up contr...
If it was the case that FRI was accurately characterized here, then do we know of other EA orgs that would promote mass termination of life? If not, then it it is a necessary example, plain and simple.
This would be bad, if true, given that it is essentially the same complaint that was levelled against Julia Wise, of community health, by Alexey Guzey previously.