All of Jessica McCurdy🔸's Comments + Replies

Quick Pitch for Using Toggl

  • Reduces task switching:
    • Actively changing the task in Toggl makes you more aware of switching.
    • Helps maintain focus on one task longer.
    • For small or miscellaneous tasks, I use grouped categories (e.g. "Smalls", "Slack/email") and batch them.
       
  • Tracks time against priorities:
    • Allows reflection on whether your actual time spent aligns with your intended priorities.
    • Easy to spot when too much time is going to low-priority tasks.
       
  • Improves time estimation:
    • Over time, you get calibrated on how long tasks really take.
    • Some tasks consis
... (read more)
1
Christoph Hartmann 🔸
100% agree. For those that can't build the habit with toggle, try DoneThat. Same benefits except for the first point! https://donethat.ai https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/wt8gKaH9usKy3LQmK/you-should-probably-track-your-time-and-it-just-got-easier 

Thank you for sharing this! I think it is a really great and helpful read and highlights some important values that I identify with.  I have already shared it a few times :) 

2
Vaidehi Agarwalla 🔸
+1 me too!

Thanks for sharing your experiences and reflections here — I really appreciate the thoughtfulness. I want to offer some context on the group organizer situation you described, as someone who was running the university groups program at the time.

On the strategy itself:
 At the time, our scalable programs were pretty focused from evidence we had seen that much of the impact came from the organizers themselves. We of course did want groups to go well more generally, but in deciding where to put our marginal resource we were focusing on group organizers. I... (read more)

Thank you for thoughtfully engaging! On the growth team side, Angelina is unfortunately ill right now, but we plan on responding to this in a few days when she gets back :) 

I just want to quickly note that I think there are a lot of people who would resonate with the principles of EA but haven't heard about it. Very few people have heard of EA, and while there are some methodological nuances to be had with this study, it suggests that the number of EA-sympathetic students on NYU’s campus is over 5x the number of students who were sympathetic and familiar with EA. So generally, I think there is a lot of potential growth available of people who do strongly align to EA principles.

You could argue that growth mechanisms ... (read more)

Thanks Neel! I’ve jotted down some quick clarifications below.

Overall: as I mentioned in my previous comment, I don’t think growth is obviously good and there are a lot of various risks to be aware of. I also think that even though it is only one of four strategy pillars at CEA it is a somewhat easier pillar for us to contribute to as we have more foundations for it. That could mean us unintentionally prioritizing it too much, and that is something I am trying to track. So, overall, I am sympathetic to a lot of your concerns but generally am... (read more)

2
Neel Nanda
Thanks a lot for the clarifications. If you agree with my tactical claims and are optimising for growth over a longer time frame than I agree, we probably don't disagree much on actions and the actions you describes and cautions seem very reasonable to me. To me Growth feels like a somewhat unhelpful handle here that pushes me in the mind frame of what leads to short-term growth rather than a sustainable healthy community. But if it feels useful to you, fair enough

Hi, I'm Jessica, and I lead the growth pillar of CEA’s strategy. I’m excited about the potential for the EA community to grow and for EA ideas to reach more people, and I wanted to share how we’re thinking about that growth.

Our main goal is the same as EA’s: to help others as effectively as possible. We believe that growing the EA community can help us achieve more of the good we want to see in the world. While the community isn’t perfect, I’m proud of its accomplishments. I believe it can help many more people increase their impact—while the EA ... (read more)

Agus is one of my favorite people I have ever worked with! Would recommend :) 

Quick take on Burnout

Note: I am obviously not an expert here nor do I have much first hand experience but I thought it could be useful for people I work with to know how I currently conceptualize burnout. I was then encouraged to post on the forum. This is based off around 4 cases of burnout that I have seen (at varying levels of proximity) and conversations with people who have seen significantly more.

  • Different Conceptions of Burnout
    • Basic conception that people often have: working too hard until energy is depleted.
    • Yes, working too hard can lead to exhaust
... (read more)
3
David_Moss
Relatedly, I think in many cases burnout is better conceptualised as depression (perhaps with a specific work-related etiology).  Whether burnout is distinct from depression at all is a controversy within the literature: * https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272735815000173 * https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jclp.22229 * https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00284/full * https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-18074-001 I think that this has the practical implications that people suffering from burnout should at least consider whether they are depressed and consider treatment options with that in mind (e.g. antidepressants, therapy).  There's a risk that the "burnout" framing limits the options people are considering (e.g. that they need rest / changes to their workplace). At the same time, there's a risk that people underestimate the extent to which environmental changes are relevant to their depression, so changing their work environment should also be considered if a person does conclude they might be depressed.

Very quickly: I feel like it's useful to share that I did this survey and found it very hard, and a lot of other people did too. In particular, it did feel pretty rushed for such difficult questions that we didn't necessarily have a fully informed pre-existing take on. OP does mention this, but I wanted to stress that for people reading this post.

I still think it has a lot of useful information and is directionally very informative. I might get a chance to write up more thoughts here, but I am not sure I will be able to. I mostly wanted to give a quick additional flag :) 

I had a similar sense of feeling underprepared and rushed while taking the survey and think my input would have been better with more time and a different setting. At the same time I can see that it could have been hard to get the same group of people to answer without these constraints.

For the monetary value of talent I‘m especially cautious on putting much weight on them as I haven’t seen much discussion on such estimates and coming up with a numbers in minutes is hard.

Rather than accepting the numbers at face value, they may be more useful for illustrating directional thinking at a specific moment in time.

2
David_Moss
Thanks for the comment Jessica! This makes sense. I have a few thoughts about this: * More time for people to answer, and in particular to reflect, sounds like it could have been useful (though I wasn't at the event, so I can't comment on the tradeoffs here). * My impression is that the difficulty of the survey is mostly due to the inherent difficulty of the questions we were asked to elicit judgements about (either/both because the questions were substantively difficult and required a lot of information/reflection- e.g. what is the optimal growth rate for EA- or because they're very conceptually difficult/counterintuitive- e.g. how much value do you assign to x relative to y controlling for the value of x's converting into y's), and less because of the operationalization of the questions themselves (see the confusion about earlier iterations of the questions). * One possible response to this, which was mentioned in feedback, is that it could be valuable to pose these questions to dedicated working groups, who devote extensive amounts of time to deliberating on them. Fwiw, this sounds like a very useful (though very costly) initiative to me. It would also have the downside of limiting input to an even smaller subset of the community: so perhaps ideally one would want to pose these questions to a dedicated group, presenting their findings to the wider MCF audiences, and then ask the MCF audience for their take after hearing the working group's findings. Of course, this would take much more time from everyone, so it wouldn't be valuable. * Another possible response is to just try to elicit much simpler judgements. For example, rather than trying to actually get a quantitative estimate of "how many resources do you think think each cause should get?", we could just ask "Do you think x should get more/less?" I think the devil is in the details here, and it would work better for some questions than others e.g. in some cases, merely knowing whether people think a
2
James Herbert
Could you flag which questions you felt most comfortable with? Or least comfortable with? Whichever is easier :)

Thanks for sharing this! The power of prompts and letting go of nice to haves have been things I've noticed in my work as well. Good luck with your future efforts here!

Thank you! And thank you so much for your podcasts - like I mentioned in the post I found them really helpful and relatable and am grateful for you sharing so much!

I'm on buproprion xl and generally they don't recommend taking it at night because it can cause insomnia but I'm really lucky and have never really had problems with that. Instead, I just found waking up in the morning extremely difficult - I often woke up sad and just wanted to stay in bed and keep sleeping (even if I had slept a really long time). Due to the extended release, taking it at night means that peak effects are now happening in the mornings when I was most sad / low motivation before. So that was honestly just really great for me.

This is super interesting! How do you do the experiments? Do you change one thing at a time and track?

1
Jonas Hallgren 🔸
I just did different combinations of the sleep supplements, you still get the confounder effects but it removes some of the cross-correlation. So Glycine 3 days, no magnesium followed by magnesium 3 days, no glycine e.t.c. It's not necessarily going to give you a high accuracy but you can see if it works or not and a rough effect size

Thanks! I actually also was using bearable for a while there and had a similar experience of "it's hard to find out info because of confounders but this is generally useful for being mindful of my wellbeing". I don't use it any more but might look into it again :)

I remember thinking it was super cool when I found it

Thank you for writing and sharing this! I'm excited about your work and also excited for other orgs to learn from it :)

This is really impressive output for such a small team!

3
lauren_mee 🔸
Thank you Jessica 💚 I guess the next challenge will be can we maintain the good outputs over time and if our team grows! It’s nice to know other people are also excited about our work. I would love more people to share progress updates on what their orgs are up to too.
1
Animal Advocacy Careers
Thank you so much for reading. We deeply appreciate your recognition of AAC’s efforts over the years. We are definitely very happy to share this with all organisations working on the same goals as ours!

Hey

I am really sorry to hear about all of these negative experiences.  I feel lucky to have gotten to work with you over the years and seen the positive impact you have had on others in the community and the exciting work you have moved into. I think the community will be losing a really lovely person. I admire both your courage in posting this and that you are prioritizing your well-being right now. 

I was sad to hear that our team contributed to your negative experiences though I definitely understand. When I first was introduced to the idea of ... (read more)

kta
14
7
0
1

Hi Jessica! I also was happy to work with you. Thanks for commenting. I want to reiterate that I understood this decision and why it was done, but I can’t say it made me feel good (esp when it happened. Maybe one good way to describe it was it felt CEA had favorite kids). And I’ve gotten lots of private messages after this post voicing out similar sad feelings. As someone who does believe in effective decision-making and impartiality in this, I really just understood and accepted it.

I think in my post I was trying to voice out my feelings of sadness I’ve h... (read more)

2
Benevolent_Rain
I have never done community building and am probably ignorant of many ongoing initiatives so maybe I am stating the obvious below.  I am just wondering about mid-career professionals: Could one not easily abandon the focus on elite universities for this group? I think I have seen calls for getting more mid-career professionals into EA (@Letian Wang mentions this in another comment on this post), and I think at a mid-career point people have sufficient track record in their discipline/industry that one can almost completely disregard their education. In my experience, some of the most talented people I have worked with were people who either never considered moving to the UK/US to attend elite universities, or who just did not take university too seriously but later found ways to make significant contributions in their field. Maybe this is more true outside of research roles, as researchers still seem to have a harder time "decoupling" from their undergrad.
8
Arepo
For what it's worth, I sympathise with the need to make some hard prioritisation decisions - that's what EA is about, after all. Nonetheless, it seems like the choice to focus on top universities has been an insufficiently examined heuristic. After all, the following claim... ... is definitely false unless the only categorisation we're doing of people is 'the university they go to'. We can subdivide people into any categories we have data on, and while 'university' provides a convenient starting point for a young impact-focused organisation, it seems like a now-maturing impact-focused organisation should aspire to do better.  For a simple example, staying focused on universities, most university departments receive their own individual rankings, which are also publicly available (I think the final score for the university is basically some weighted average of these, possibly with some extra factors thrown in).  I'm partially motivated to write this comment because I know of someone who opted to go to the university with the better department for their subject, and has recently found out that, by opting to go to the university with the lower overall ranking, they're formally downgraded by both immigration departments and EA orgs. So it seems like EA orgs could do better simply by running a one-off project that pooled departmental rankings and prioritising based on that. It would probably be a reasonably substantial (but low skill) one-off cost with a slight ongoing maintenance cost, but if 'finding the best future talent' is so important to EA orgs, it seems worth putting some ongoing effort into doing it better. [ETA - apparently there are some premade rankings that do this!] This is only one trivial suggestion - I suspect there are many more sources of public data that seem like they could be taken into account to make a fairer and (which IMO is equivalent) more accurate prioritisation system. Since as the OP points out, selecting for the top 100 universities
Guy Raveh
37
20
16
1
1

top universities are the places with the highest concentrations of people who ultimately have a very large influence on the world

I think this as a piece of reasoning represents a major problem in the perceptions of EA. While it might be factually true, there are two problems with relying on it:

  1. It means surrendering ourselves to this existing state as opposed to trying to change it and create a more equal world.
  2. It means the goal of EA community building is regarded as a funnel trying to get individuals into existing positions determined by the system
... (read more)

Hi Andreas,

This is a different and unrelated role (you can compare the role descriptions to see more differences)

We are currently doing work trials for candidates for the group support contractor role. 

Hi Isaac, this is a good question! I can elaborate more in the Q&A tomorrow but here are some thoughts:

Ultimatley a lot depends on your personal fit and comparative advantage. I think people should do the things they excel at. While I do think you can have a more scalable impact on the groups team, the groups team would have very little to no impact without the organizers working on the ground! 

I can share some of the reasons that led me to prefer working at CEA over working on the ground:

  • I value having close management to help me think through my
... (read more)

Hey Camille,

Thanks for writing this and I am sorry you faced so many struggles and felt alone. 

Arguments around students not having time feel surprising to me. Do you feel like your students are significantly busier than say, MIT students? I would defer to you since you have more context, but I have heard the "students don't have time" answer from a lot of universities that eventually ran quite successful clubs. So I think it would be interesting to know what ENS students are doing with their time? Do more students work outside schooling or is there a... (read more)

2
Camille
Hello Jessica, thanks for your comment.  To be completely honest, I can't describe very precisely what does it mean for ENS students to be "busy", because I didn't ask students for their time schedule.  I'm not paid by the state, but I do remember having 25 hours of class a week in master's degree, plus I remember hearing there was 3/4 hours of work for each two hours of class. However, there is a big difference between my case and someone who has a contract with the state. This said, as a general impression, I'm fairly confident that the average student at ENS is busier than in an Ivy league college. A visiting researcher once told this to me.  Also, students are usually freer during a full-time, 35h/week internship, and I also know that ENS is fairly incompatible with having a job on the side. Finally, some students have classes from 7 to 9 pm. When asked about their organizational skills, a member of the administration told me they were "very well organized", so it didn't seem like the bottleneck.  That's the best I can tell so far, but I'll try looking into this in more detail. I forgot to mention it, but we did try reading during the session once or twice (we had already mainly started the projects, then). This is a very good point ! I translated the text myself with the help of a translation software, since EA France is not finished yet with the more carefully done translations. We plan on doing this more systematically this year. About UGAP, my prediction is mainly the result of Joris himself telling me that it didn't seem that useful, having heard my troubles. I might have over-deferred here, and I'd be happy to discuss ^^

(I lead the CEA uni groups team but don’t intend to respond on behalf of CEA as a whole and others may disagree with some of my points)
 

Hi Dave,

I just want to say that I appreciate you writing this. The ideas in this post are ones we have been tracking for a while and you are certainly not alone in feeling them. 

I think there is a lot of fruitful discussion in the comments here about strategy-level considerations within the entire EA ecosystem and I am personally quite compelled by many of the points in Will’s comment. So, I will focus specifical... (read more)

4
freedomandutility
Hi Jessica, if you have time, I’d love to get your thoughts on some of my suggestions to improve university group epistemics via the content of introductory fellowships: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/euzDpFvbLqPdwCnXF/university-ea-groups-need-fixing?commentId=z7rPNpaqNZPXH2oBb
1[comment deleted]

Hi! Just responding on the groups team side :)

This is a good observation. As we mentioned in this retrospective from last Fall, we decided to restrict UGAP to only new university groups to keep the program focused. In the past, we had more leeway and admitted some university groups that had been around longer. I think we have hit a ~ plateau on the number of new groups we expect to pop up each semester (around 20-40) so I don't expect this program to keep growing.

We piloted a new program for organizers from existing groups in the winter alongside the most ... (read more)

1
ronsterlingmd
I have been an "unofficial" golden rule guy all my life (do they have an org or certification?)  I have been following EA for many years and have done my part in my profession over the years to think in terms of more than monetizing, aggregating, streamlining, making bucks.  As a healthcare provide in the US until recent retirement, I provided thousands of hours of pro bono or sliding scale work to meet the real needs of the clients I assisted which, as you may know, in the US healthcare has been manipulated into aggressive money making schemes. Intro over.  I found that without a good domain name or service mark, my work on the web with providing up to date mental health care information did not get much attention.  When I dove in using the domain name DearShrink.com, attention to and distribution of reliable information became much more effective. I am wondering if CEA has  thought about a service mark or motto that would be easier to understand, identify with, get attached to, and remember, such as BeKindAndProsper com (.org .net) If so, please advise me as to how I could move these domain names on to the future they did not get a chance to have with me (I was a little optimistic...).  I sure don't want to sell those domain names to some manipulative merch to make themselves appear good. Let me know Ron Sterling MD (retired) Author, writer, neuroscientist
2
AnonymousEAForumAccount
Thanks for providing that background Jessica, very helpful. It'd be great to see metrics for the OSP included in the dashboard at some point. It might also make sense to have the dashboard provide links to additional information about the different programs (e.g. the blog posts you link to) so that users can contextualize the dashboard data.

I want to chip in that several years ago it was very normal for retreat participants to chip in on the cost of the retreats. I think this is pretty normal in comparison settings (ie: student group retreats for clubs in the US) and would be excited about more groups doing a bit more of this (not necessarily all of them but I think this isn't in the option space of some group organizers right now and should be). I think this gives participants a bit more stake in the retreat going well but that is not super evidence-based. 

It is also, always possible to... (read more)

7
James Herbert
Yes good point! We haven't done this yet (apart from the fact we expect participants to cover their own travel costs (easily done in NL with good public transport)) BUT for our 'EA professionals' retreat last autumn we did ask people to give an indication of how much they'd be willing to pay. I've included the results below. And to give an idea of the respondents, here's some more data:

I also want to express some appreciation for what you are doing. I am really glad to see this series being posted and I think it is generating a lot of useful conversation. <3

Published: Who gives? Characteristics of those who have taken the Giving What We Can pledge

The paper I worked on with Matti Wilks for my thesis was published! Lizka successfully did her job and convinced me to share it on the forum. 

I'm sharing this here, but I probably won't engage with it (or comments about it) too seriously as a heads up --- this was a project I worked on a few years ago and it's not super relevant to me anymore.

Hi Robert,

Thanks for the questions! 

I am just adding a quick response now because I think Max’s response does a good job of covering most of your questions. I would be happy to expand if you like, though.

We are more optimistic now because, as mentioned, the landscape is quite different and we are testing out focusing on different types of support than before. For example, we are not currently planning on restarting the campus specialist program but are investigating things like group organizer retreats for top universities (which was a more well-received aspect of the campus specialist program).

Writing this in a purely personal capacity in my effort to comment more on forum posts as I think of responses:

This is just a general meta point but, to me, this post is trying to take on wayyyy too many ideas and claims. I was really intrigued by some of them and would like to see more thorough and detailed arguments for them (ie: the fog, where are the effects, arbitrage, and the ants) . However, since this tried to make so many separate points, many claims were left unsubstantiated which decreased my confidence in the post and most single points within ... (read more)

5
turchin
Actually, I wanted to say something like this: "here is a list of half-baked critiques, let me know which ones intrigue you and I will elaborate on them", but removed my introduction, as I think that it will be too personal. Below is what was  cut: "I consider myself an effective altruist: I strive for the benefit of the greatest number of people. I spent around 15 years of my life on topics which I consider EA.  At the same time, there is some difference in my understanding of EA from the “mainstream” EA: My view is that the real good is prevention of human extinction, the victory over death and in the possibility of unlimited evolution for everyone. This understanding in some aspects diverges from the generally accepted in EA, where more importance is given to the number of happy moments in human and animal life.  During my work, I encounter several potential criticisms of EA. In the following, I will briefly characterize each of them."

Hi Ivy,

Just wanted to hop in re: the University Group Accelerator program. You are definitely hitting on some key points that we have been strategizing around for UGAP. I just want to clarify a few things:

  • * We see 25 hours as the minimum amount of time engaging with EA ideas before someone should help start a group. Often times we think it should be more but there have been cases of really great organizers springing up after just an intro fellowship. We have additional screening for UGAP groups beyond just meeting the pre-requisites that dive a bit more in
... (read more)
1
nananana.nananana.heyhey.anon
Re: “there have been cases of really great organizers springing up after just an intro fellowship.” I definitely believe this can happen and am glad you allow for that. What makes someone seem really great — epistemics, alignment/buy-in, skill in a relevant area of study, __?
5
Ivy Mazzola
Thanks for responding! I'm actually super excited about UGAP and have already recommended the program to student organizers now that your applications are open (applications are open, people!). I do note that the 25 hour time commitment is for "at least one organizer", but I also think mentoring will go a long way to make those 25+/- hours count for more. That's great that you do interviews to determine quality and you clarify what quality content is. Excited to see what comes of it :)

Overall, CEA is planning to spend ~$1.5mil on uni group support in 2022 across ~75 campuses, which is a  lot less than $1mil/campus. :) 

Fwiw, I personally would be excited about CEA spending much more on this at their current level of certainty if there were ways to mitigate optics, community health, and tail risk issues.

2
Jack Lewars
Indeed :-) I had understood from this post (https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/FjDpyJNnzK8teSu4J/) that this was the destination, though, so the current rate of spending would be less relevant than having good heuristics before we get to that scale. I see from Max below, though, that Open Phil is assuming a lot of this spending, so sorry for throwing a grenade at CEA if you're not actually going to be behind a really 'move the needle' amount of campus spending.

Sorry, I was trying to get a quick response to this post and I made a stronger claim than I intended. I was trying to say that I think that EA careers are doing much more good than the ones mentioned on average and so spending money is a good bet here. I wasn’t intending to make a definitive judgment about the overall social impact of those other careers, though I know my wording suggests that. I also generally want to note that this element was a personal claim and not necessarily a CEA endorsed one. 

2
Charles He
This was a great comment and thoughtful reply and the top comment was great too. Looking at the other threads generated from the top comment, it looks like tiny turns of phrase in that top comment, produced (unreasonably) large amounts of discussion. I think we all learned a valuable lesson about the importance of clarity and precision when commenting on the EA forum.

Just another super quick response that doesn't cover everything and is purely my own thoughts and not necessarily accurate to CEA:

  • We are currently expanding the groups team :) We are careful about scaling too fast and want to make high-quality offers. You can read some more on hiring in previous CEA reports.
  • Ideally, people have entirely passed off their group by the end of their senior year (ie: someone else has been running the group and they have just been advising). 
  • Much of the groups team's hiring process is blinded and has clear guidelines and ru
... (read more)

Hi Jack,

Just a quick response on the CEA’s groups team end.

We are processing many small grants and other forms of support for CB  and we do not have the capacity to publish BOTECs on all of them. 

However, I can give some brief heuristics that we use in the decision-making.

Institutions like Facebook, Mckinsey, and Goldman spend ~ $1 million per school per year at the institutions they recruit from trying to pull students into lucrative careers that probably at best have a neutral impact on the world. We would love for these students to instead foc... (read more)

8
Guy Raveh
Hi, thanks for your comment. While it's reasonable not to be able to provide an impact estimate for every specific small grant, I think there are some other things that could increase transparency and accountability, for example: * Publishing your general reasoning and heuristics explicitly on the CEA website. * Publishing a list of grants, updated with some frequency. * Giving some statistics on which sums went to what type of activities - again, updated once in a while.
[comment deleted]12
0
0

Just as a casual observation, I would much rather hire someone who had done a couple of years at McKinsey than someone coming straight out of undergrad with no work experience. So I'm not sure that diverting talented EAs from McKinsey (or similar) is necessarily best in the long run for expected impact. No EA organization can compete with the ability of McK to train up a new hire with a wide array of generally useful skills in a short amount of time. 

Hi Jessica, 

Thanks for outlining your reasoning here, and I'm really excited about the progress EA groups are making around the world. 

I could easily be missing something here, but why are we comparing the value of CEA's community building grants to the value of Mckinsey etc? 

Isn't the relevant comparison CEA's community building grants vs other EA spending, for example GiveWell's marginally funded programs (around 5x the cost-effectiveness of cash transfers)? 

If CEA is getting funding from non-EA sources, however, this query would be i... (read more)

Just a quick response on the CEA’s groups team end.

...

Institutions like Facebook, Mckinsey, and Goldman spend ~ $1 million per school per year at the institutions they recruit from trying to pull students into lucrative careers that probably at best have a neutral impact on the world.

I'm surprised to see CEA making such a strong claim. I think we should have strong priors against this stance, and I don't think I've seen CEA publish conclusive evidence in the opposite direction.

Firstly, note that these three companies come from very different sectors of the... (read more)

5
MaxRa
That's really interesting to me because I'm currently thinking about potential recruitment efforts at CS departments for AI safety roles. I couldn't immediately find a source for the numbers you mention, do you remember where you got them from?

Thanks Jessica, this is helpful, and I really appreciate the speed at which you replied.

A couple of things that might be quick to answer and also helpful:

  • is there an expected value of someone working in an EA career that CEA uses? The rationale above suggests something like 'we want to spend as much as top tier employers' but presumably this relates to an expected value of attracting top talent that would otherwise work at those firms?
  • I agree that it's not feasible to produce, let alone publish, a BOTEC on every payout. However, is there a bar that you're
... (read more)

Hi Charles,

I am not writing in an official CEA capacity but just wanted to respond with a couple quick personal thoughts that don't cover everything you mentioned

  • I am sorry you had negative experiences while organizing.
  • I do think a lot has changed in the community building space in the past year.
  • Right now CEA has about 1.5 fte covering ~100 groups so it isn't possible to keep completely up to date on each group but we are working to expand capacity so we can offer some additional support.  In particular, our new University Group Accelerator Program ai
... (read more)
6
Charlie_Guthmann
Hi, Thanks for the thoughtful reply, appreciate it. Super valid points. Upon re-reading it seems I may have come off insultingly towards the community building contingent of EA. Certainly not my intention! I think y'all are doing a great job and I def don't want to give the impression that I would have a better plan in mind. I am  somewhat familiar with the recent initiatives with universities and think they will def be solid also.  * Makes me a bit sad that you need to be publicly engaged to receive recognition. I understand this is probably just a truism about life, not anyone in particulars fault.  * Good to hear things are moving forward, def rooting for the success of the new initiatives.  * Can you comment on why there are only 1.5 FTE covering uni groups? does no one want those jobs? Trying to be very careful abt scaling? Seems remarkably low when considering potential Cost Benefit but I haven't thought about it enough.  I don't think it would be crazy to have as many as 25 FTE but maybe that is completely ridiculous( maybe this is happening w/ugap?). * Good to hear that you care about delegation/passing off. I wonder if you think it's worth making it clear to people that this incentive exists? or do you think it is clear already? Moreover if you hire people at the end of senior year of college how do you know whether or not they did a good job passing off the group? * I wonder what you think would happen if you were a nepotist- say you advantaged the community builders you had closer relationships with in hiring/referal decisions. Would you expect to be fired and how quickly?  Again I just want to clarify that I don't think EA community builders are doing anything specifically wrong per se, and I don't think most of these issues are even super specific to the community building sector of EA. I think the issues I brought up would be present in pretty much any new social movement that is fast scaling and has lots of opportunities. 

Hi Michael, 

We've primarily been responding to the existing demand of group leaders running university groups, as opposed to seeding groups from scratch and we are prioritizing particularly scalable programs right now instead of bespoke support (as we wrote about in the "MVP University Group Program" in our Q3 update). There is significant existing demand for supporting new group organizers and we want to be sure to make the pathway smooth and simple for interested and prepared university groups. We expect to support the start-up stages of ~20 new uni... (read more)

This is very exciting! 

I am looking into creating and running some trainings for group organizers through CEA Scalable Uni Support :).  If you or others would be interested in helping to create these, please let me know at jessica.mccurdy@centreforeffectivealtruism.org.  

I am particularly excited to hear from people who are willing to take lead on creating and running specific trainings. I think winter break is a great time for organizers to take on projects like this. For example, last winter I made the facilitator training for EAVP as a wi... (read more)

I think the big ones were the cluelessness week and the small probabilities week.

 Cluelessness week pointed out that we can't really know the long-term effects of our actions. So people became suspicious that we can knowably affect the long-term future at all. This ended up being more of an empirical claim than a moral one.

The small probabilities week was challenging when put to the extreme (ie: God at your deathbed thought experiment). Additionally, some felt like the numbers of the expected future that people like  Bostrom use were basically pu... (read more)

I was lucky enough to get to take this class and really enjoyed it (though it was very difficult!). I thought it did a good job of showing both strengths and weaknesses in longtermism.  Interestingly, it seemed to have pretty different impacts on different students with some becoming significantly less longtermist and a few becoming more longtermist. Would be happy to answer any questions people have about the course :)

I would be happy to hear stories of people becoming significantly less longtermist. What changed their minds?

Hi Tony!

We actually originally created the scoring breakdown partly to help with unconscious biases. Before, we had given people a general score after an interview but we learned that that is often really influenced by biases and that breaking scores down into components with specific things to look for would reduce that.  We are hoping the checkbox system we are trialing out this semester will reduce it even more as it aims to be even more objective. It is still possible, though, that it would lead to a systemic bias if the checkboxes themselves have... (read more)

My instinctual response to this was: "well it is not very helpful to admit someone for whom it would be great if they got into EA if they really seem like they won't".

 However, since it seems like we are not particularly good at predicting whether they will get involved or not maybe this is a metric we should incorporate. (My intuition is that we would still want a baseline? There could be someone it would be absolutely amazing to have get involved but if they are extremely against EA ideas and disruptive that might lower the quality of the fellowship... (read more)

Thank you so much for this! It is super helpful! Is the raw data from the 2018 survey available anywhere?

2
David_Moss
Unfortunately, none of them are online at the moment, but we'll re-upload previous years somewhere once last year's data has been processed for public release.

From what I have read there is an important difference between perceptions of life satisfaction and well-being/happiness. Perception of life satisfaction continues to grow but actual affective well-being basically stops increasing after around $75,000. I have seen this a lot stemming back to this study. I did most of my research on this a few years ago so it might be outdated. Of course well being research is just really difficult and it is still unknown what exactly we should be measuring.

9
Linch
Hi Jessica,  You might be interested in the latest study which seems to suggest that both life satisfaction and perceived well-being increases proportionally with log(income), though the former has larger correlation than the latter,  at least for employed Americans in this large-scale study:  From the paper:    
2
Prabhat Soni
BTW Jessica, the $75K figure from Kahneman's paper that you mentioned is from 2010. After adjusting for inflation, that's ~$90K in 2021 dollars (exact number depends on the inflation calculator you used).
7
MichaelPlant
The most recent worldwide study on income and subjective well-being is Jebb et al. (2018). FWIW they find there are "satiation" points for the effect of income on SWB, measures as happiness, positive affect, and negative affect, nearly everywhere but that it's often higher than $75k.
2
Linch
Thanks a lot for the link, appreciate it!

Note: While I contributed to one of the posts about unsuccessful high-school outreach my experience with teaching EA concepts to high schoolers is much more limited than the others in the post. Most of my thoughts on this are based off of a few experiences teaching high schoolers, discussions with other people teaching high schoolers, my relative freshness out of high school (Graduated in 2017), and some extrapolations from running Yale EA and interacting with first-years.

As someone who contributed to one of the posts about unsuccessful high-school outreac... (read more)

Could you possibly share how much the ACE off-set was? I have been having trouble finding a good number for this when people ask me about it.

5
Robert_Wiblin
I Jessica, IIRC the main problem you'll likely encounter is that some naïve cost-effectiveness estimates will give you a really low figure, like donating $1 to corporate campaigns is as effective as being vegan a whole year. (Not exactly, but that order of magnitude.) Given that I'm inclined to just make it the lowest amount that feels substantial and like it would actually plausibly be enough to make someone else veg*n for a year — for me that means about $100 a year.
4
Michelle_Hutchinson
I think he donated £25 for that year, but I'm not sure how he picked that number and I have to admit I haven't been very systematic since then. I think the following year I donated £100 to ACE, then missed a year, then for 2 years did 10% of my annual donations to the animal welfare EA fund (I'm a member of Giving What We Can, so that's 1% of my salary). I'm not sure I have a reasoned case for donating to animal welfare charities as offsets, since the animals that are helped are different to those I harm and consequentially it would surely be best to make all my donations to the organisation I think will help sentient beings most. But it seems pretty good to remember that I think it's important and impactful to help various groups to whom I don't give the lions share of my donations, and it seems plausibly good to show to others that I care about them by doing something concrete. With those considerations in mind it simply seems important for the donation to be an amount that feels non-negligible to me and others, rather than an amount exactly equal to the harm I'm doing. (That may simply be a rationalisation though, because I would rather not know exactly how much harm I'm causing and it would be a hassle to figure it out.)

General Positive Notes:

I think building relationships between EA professionals and groups is highly valuable and think that programs such as residencies could be really beneficial.

As someone, who had not met too many EA professionals (outside of community builders) until fairly recently I can at least attest to how beneficial it was for me. I was able to have deep discussions on EA issues with those who knew more about EA than anyone I had met before. This led to me changing some of my ideas on things and generally having a better understanding of where E... (read more)

For the past couple of bazaars we have been following the aim to get lots of email sign ups but I am starting to wonder if this is the best strategy for us. At Yale in particular the bazaar is super hectic and first-years end up signing up for tons of panlists. It seems like that leads to not that many people actually reading all of these emails.

In our experience people are exceptionally more likely to come to things after being personally invited as compared to reading about it on an email. I agree that the bazaar is much too loud and hectic for a good co... (read more)

1
DavidNash
A two stage strategy might be best, outreach for the first week, then core community the rest of the semester. It may be that getting lots of email sign ups can be okay to then pass on 80,000 Hours material, the first few events and 1-1 sign up. I've heard from quite a few people that they first heard of EA at a university fair and kept on getting the 80,000 Hours emails and then got much more involved once they started working 3-5 years later. After focusing on outreach for the first week, I agree it probably makes sense to focus on the core 5-30 people who are actually interested in EA rather than trying to put on events for the wider student audience that signed up to everything but wont really come to anything. If there is a situation where someone is really interested but it's hectic, I would put a note by their name to remember to reach out to them individually rather than prioritising the 5 minute conversation.
Load more