All of Kaleem's Comments + Replies

Hi - thanks for writing this/thinking about it - I feel like it's very "old school EA" and maybe we don't see/do enough of this type of investigation anymore on the forum ?

I want to note that I think this post would be improved quite a bit by having a more defined "what's the issue/how is this bad?" type section - I had to read it twice to find that info, and I feel like it could be expanded-upon

1
Kashvi Mulchandani 🔸
Thank you for the feedback! Will edit the post and add this.

Idk how to make the right people at CEA see this but: I thought the theme/header at the top of the forum during Giving Season has been unbelievably good-looking ! The orange, the yellow, the images ! Would be kinda sick for it to have something like that all the time

2
NickLaing
I agree its excellent and a big improvement - maybe still room for improvement? Maybe a bit bright? Maybe not enough contrast with the background image? But  a great step in the right direction I love it, especially for special weeks/months like this one :)
9
Toby Tremlett🔹
Thanks Kaleem! The right people at CEA will see basically any quick take lol (I read them all).  I love it too - it's all down to @Agnes Stenlund 🔸 !

I don't think I feel strongly either way, but why is this something that should posted on the EA Forum ? I don't think its obvious/clear how someone should view this other than just random AI-industry news ?

Jason
26
17
1
1

I think discussion of StopAI is clearly in scope here. A StopAI organizer has posted here before, and received a mixed reaction from the community.

To give one example of practical relevance, the post immediately above this one (on my current feed) considers financially supporting StopAI, although it expresses concerns about their tactics. That a co-founder of the group has been allegedly talking about violence and potential use of weapons against AI folks strikes me as pretty relevant for readers who may have been considering support of, or even involvemen... (read more)

Hi @joey and @MCF - just wanted to point out that on more than one occasion when I've been reviewing someone's grant proposal, they thought "clear passes" in the "what do we mean by meta?" section meant something like "things we'd pass on funding"/"things we wouldn't consider funding" rather than "things which pass our test for fundability/things we defs want to fund". Maybe not a huge issue but probably worth making a small edit for clarity.

maybe a dumb question, but why do you (feel the need to) reward your LLM ?

I want to get in the habit of treating AIs with dignity and respect. 

7
DavidNash
And how much of a reward is it for your boss to ask if you want to write something (with a sense of obligation and worry about what happens if you don't say yes). Nice story though.
1
DavidB
Thank you! I really appreciate it!

Glad that this exists - I was worried about the lack of fiscal sponsors/ops-support orgs available in the EA ecosystem post-FTX crash.

Sorry if this is a dumb question but: why are two of the three people working on this project (Sparkwell) also working on a different but very similar project (ImpactOps)? (e.g. why would someone approach one org over another?). Thanks

1
PipFoweraker
Commenting to note that Ashgro is another fiscal sponsorship and ops-support org that’s been operating post-FTX as well that focuses on AI safety and adjacent projects.
4
andrewleeke
Thanks Kaleem! To add on to what Josh said: It’s currently myself (Andrew) and Jeffrey who are running SparkWell day-to-day. While I co-founded Impact Ops, I no longer work there. Josh works at Impact Ops, and also advises SparkWell. However, he doesn’t work for SparkWell or on the program day-to-day. As for the differences between the orgs: * SparkWell provides fiscal sponsorship, and associated operational and financial services — as well as monthly check-ins, supplementary advisory support, and more. All of this is covered by the 7% service fee. * Impact Ops doesn’t provide fiscal sponsorship. It’s an operations agency, which provides consultancy and hands-on support across a range of nonprofit functions (incl. finance, recruitment, and entity setup). Given Impact Ops’s experience with managing finances for nonprofits, SparkWell outsources accountancy and bookkeeping etc. to Impact Ops. Appreciate this can be a little confusing! But the headline is that these are separate organizations run by different people, offering different sets of services.
3
Josh Axford
Hi Kaleem,  Impact Ops has been providing and will continue to provide operational support to Anti Entropy and Sparkwell, hence the involvement of Impact Ops team members both publicly and behind the scenes.  Via the SparkWell program, AntiEntropy is offering fiscal sponsorship to early stage organisations, this is not something Impact Ops provides.  To answer your second question more directly, a project would approach SparkWell if they are looking for mentoring and temporary fiscal sponsorship to test their idea before launching a new entity. Whereas a project would approach Impact Ops if they have already decided to launch a new entity and need support doing so, or if they already have an entity and require outsourced support from one of the 6 service areas that Impact Ops provides.  Impact Ops just posted a 2 year reflection piece on the lessons learned from the first 2 years of serving high impact non-profits which might help clarify the differentiation between Impact Ops and SparkWell- https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/NWTEuaMDiGhcJQvLZ/lessons-learned-from-two-years-supporting-high-impact 

so im a fool because you betrayed my trust? im a fool for holding what you say with complete sincerity? i’m not the fool, you are

(credit: https://x.com/FilledwithUrine/status/1906905867296927896)

Answer by Kaleem15
0
0
2

I'm thinking of writing a longer/ more nuanced collaborative piece discussing global vs local EA community building that I touched on in a previous post.

What do you mean by "HEA"?

2
Eli Svoboda🔸
I'm pretty sure they're referring to the idea of a "highly engaged effective altruist", which is a common metric used by EA community builders.  The Centre for Effective Altruism defines it as: It might make sense for the author to clarify this if so :)

This is so cool ! I'm using it to improve the BOTECs and cost-effectiveness estimates in my research into effective zakat, and islamic FAW interventions

3
Ozzie Gooen
Good to hear! Do let us know if there are any frustrations you have or improvements you'd like to see!

I would REALLY appreciate if someone quite good at math (especially distributions/graphs) could hop on (what I expect would be a short call) to help me sort out an issue I'm panicking over

EDIT: I'm no longer panicking, thank you to everyone who reached out !

4
NunoSempere
Did you get this sorted?

It looks and sounds like the event was a great success ! Im really happy about that :)

Could you provide some more info about the applicants and the admissions process/decisions? e.g.:

  • how many attendees had you planned on admitting ?
  • if you had more budget, would you have admitted more attendees?
  • were all 170 attendees of the quality that you'd have hoped for, or was there some relaxation of admission criteria passed a certain number of admissions?
  • were you surprised at how many applicants there were?
  • Do you have a sense of what the general applicant pool
... (read more)
1
EA Nigeria
Thanks!  * Initially, we planned to admit 100+ attendees, with the expectation of 120. As time went on, we adjusted this plan, given our better sense of our capacity, such as venue and expenses. * This is likely. There are applicants whose travel requests we cannot approve. For some of them, travel expenses are the main barrier to attendance. For those we cannot fund, we initially send them an acceptance email with a notification that their travel request has not been approved. In these cases, we confirm their admission only after they inform us they can still attend.   * We have not relaxed our admission criteria. All admitted attendees pass our admission bar. At some point, we had to increase our bar for admission when we realized that we were reaching our target and applications were still coming in.  * Not too surprised! However, the university students' applications exceed our expectations, especially from Kano. We think this is connected to our community presence at Bayero University Kano.  * We have received the expected number of applications from our existing community in Nigeria. Most applications from Africans come from individuals who have some form of engagement with EA (Effective Altruism). However, we also received several applications from people who mentioned hearing about the summit on Facebook or through their personal networks. We are still yet to fully analyze and categorize such data, but during the applications review, significant responses from individuals who do not engage with the community, specifically mentioning networks like WhatsApp groups and Facebook.

Haven't read the full report but I would hazard to guess that they're using the word long-termism to mean something quite different to what we think about when we talk about longtermism.

It's very common for people to ask for (and receive) feedback on drafts. Search "Feedback" and you'll find examples of how people have done that, and you should be fine

1
AnnaWhite
I am more interested in active help on finishing passing the drafts on a clean format/finishing them rather than just receiving feedback. If anyone is interested in the topic and wants to finish the post because they are passionate about the topic, that would be my ideal scenario 🙏 but yeah, I don't really expect that scenario to be honest. But I gotta try at least asking if anyone is interested in helping. Do people usually post about or accept those kinds of requests? Thanks for the reply. I'm gonna check those feedback examples now ❤️

What types of requests ? Like feature updates to the forum, or seeking help from other forum users on projects ?

0
AnnaWhite
Seeking help from other forum users on projects.

Got me teary eyed whilst reading the forum. wow. thank you.

I feel like the title should be more specific ? e.g. it should reference china, given the content of the post?

2
Vasco Grilo🔸
Thanks for the comment, Kaleem. I think the 1st point holds for most countries (not only China), and the 2nd and 3rd for basically all countries. I could have a title like "Farmed animals are neglected, both globally and China". However, I think this could be read as farmed animal welfare being more neglected relative to its scale in China than in other countries. I believe this is true[1], but it is not necessarily implied by the points above. 1. ^ I estimate China accounts for 33.3 % of the disability of farmed animals, but only 2.20 % of the philanthropic spending on farmed animals. I suppose one could argue these numbers are interesting, and the title could reflect them, but I am wary of communicating that more funding should to China without having looked into the respective cost-effectiveness (i.e. not only scale and neglectedness, but also tractability, which is arguably lower in China).

Hi SShaikh, thanks for following the stuff I've written about this, and thanks for the comment. Some of what I want to explain will be contained in a long/formal report I'm writing on this topic. however, a couple of points in response: 

That said, I don't think that plugging Zakat into an EA framework is possible. I haven't seen any serious Muslim scholar support using Zakat funds to avoid global catastrophic risks or future pandemics.

  1. I think you're mistaken in thinking that because zakat and longtermist projects aren't compatible (which I think is tr
... (read more)
1
Shaan Shaikh
I look forward to reading your longer report. If you're interested in convincing skeptics like me, I suggest addressing the following questions: Can Muslims give Zakat to EA causes? We agree that Zakat and longtermist projects aren't compatible, and that direct cash transfers to the poor are compatible. But what about other cause areas? I'm not familiar with Zakat being used for non-emergency global health interventions (e.g., deworming, reducing lead exposure, deploying insecticide-treated bed nets, etc.). It seems possible, given Zakat use for medical necessities during humanitarian crises (e.g., Gaza), but are there examples that you can provide here outside the context of war or natural disasters? If none currently exist, are there any orthodox Muslim scholars who support this use of Zakat? What are the specific inefficiencies with Islamic Relief, Helping Hand, and other Muslim-run charities that concern you? You inspired me to do some research, and I've found some worrying reports about Islamic Relief USA "double dipping" on administrative fees, and LaunchGood not actually verifying their "Zakat-verified" campaigns. But generally speaking, do you think the top Muslim charities have higher administrative costs than those of other charities? If so, what's your evidence? Relatedly: Do you know if GiveDirectly considered their Zakat fund for Yemen a success? Given that 100% of the funds collected were distributed to Yemeni families in need, is this kind of program sustainable? How will you convince Muslims to redirect their Zakat to non-Muslim charities? I suspect that a significant number of Muslims (including myself) will hesitate to do so. We're fine giving Sadaqah to non-Islamic institutions, but there's a general belief that Zakat should be distributed by, with, and through fellow Muslims. How do you propose tackling that issue? How will you counter local-first doctrine? We're often instructed that Zakat should be "focused locally to bring about change in
2
Jason
Indeed, effective giving being subject to donor-imposed constraints is the norm, arguably even in EA. Many donors are open only to certain cause areas, or to certain levels of risk tolerance, or to projects with decent optics, etc. Zakat compliance does not seem fundamentally different from donor-imposed constraints that we're used to working within.

lol I am one of the people who (maybe narrowly?) missed out on the incubation program. Yeah I have emailed them about hopefully people connected with any promising collaborators.

Thanks for the encouragement and the ideas :)

I haven't done any enough research to know how much this would affect the estimates but I do want to point out that zakat is calculated on wealth, and wealth is not the same thing as GDP (maybe you're already aware of this and think that GDP is a good enough proxy to estimate wealth).

FAW#3

An interesting idea (no evidence that it would work) - just putting it here for preservation more than anything else:

Insects are haraam to eat. This is obviously good news in that it means at least 20% of the global population is unlikely to contribute to the demand for insects as food. However it doesn't automatically rule-out that muslims will contribute to the demand for insects through the consumption of farmed-animals who we might use insects to feed - e.g. Chickens and Fish.

It might be worth finding out if muslims would care if their chicken or ... (read more)

2
EdoArad
Interesting idea! Seems like locusts are halal (same as in Judaism), but that may not be relevant.  Also found this - https://seekersguidance.org/answers/hanafi-fiqh/are-chickens-who-mostly-feed-on-impurities-like-ants-worms-and-insects-impermissible/
1
CB🔸
Interesting, that might be worth exploring !

We should hire leaders based on how well suited they are to running the organization in question

 

I'd argue that an important part of running a new philanthropic organisation is stakeholder engagement and relationship management, and this was not a good example of fostering a good relationship with someone who is highly influential and a likely source of valuable connections with respect to FF's goals. 

I think I agree with the general point you’re making, but I specifically I disagree that the longtermist project is incompatible with good PR, and that it doesn’t appeal to common moral intuition (eg people do care about climate change, nuclear war, rogue AI, deadly pandemics).

2
harfe
But those things are also important without longtermism. So you can make non-longtermist PR for things that longtermists like, but it would feel dishonest if you hide the part with large numbers of people millions of years into the future.

EA (via discussion of SBF and FTX) was briefly discussed on the The Rest is Politics Podcast today (the 3rd of April) and .... I'm really irritated by what was said. This is one of the largest politics podcasts in the world at the moment, and has a seriously influential listener-base.

Rory Stewart said that after 15min someone at FTXFF cut his call with Rory short because that person wanted to go have lunch. The person reportedly also said "I don't care about poverty".

Rory Stewart (the ex-President of GiveDirectly, and ex-MP) now seems to think that we are ... (read more)

I think Rory Stewart is lying... he has had problems with this recently:

https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/356-islam-freedom

(not endorsing Sam Harris here and not saying Stewart is not directionally correct).

I doubt that Nick Beckstead literally said 'I don't care about poverty'.

He seems bitter that his EA org was unable to raise funds from the Future Fund even though it had a different focus area and risk profile. Now he's shoehorning his peeves into the FTX fraud.

Wasn't the Future Fund quite explicitly about longtermist projects?

I mean if you worked for an animal foundation and were in a call about give directly, I can understand that somebody might say: "Look we are an animal fund, global poverty is outside our scope".

Obviously saying "I don't care about poverty" or something sufficiently close that your counterpart remembers it as that, is not ideal, especially not when you're speaking to an ex-minister of the United Kingdom.

But before we get mad at those who ran the Future Fund, please consider there's much cont... (read more)

1
huw
On (2), while it’s obviously rhetorically slanted, isn’t that a fair framing of longtermism? They do care more about the gazillions of future lives than the smaller number of present ones and they seem to understand that this is not aligned with popular intuitions on the subject. I am not sure longtermism is compatible with good PR or having ordinary people immediately grok its conclusions on intuition alone… (Or was your problem more that this misrepresents the actual funding allocations, in which case I wholeheartedly agree 💙)
4
JWS 🔸
My deductions were here, there are two main candidates given the information available (if it is reliable).
3
Deborah W.A. Foulkes
If you register with them you can view a number of articles for free.
2
Lorenzo Buonanno🔸
You can use https://archive.is/ to read paywalled articles, depending on your ethical views on the matter

I'm sorry that you had to go through this terrible event, but thanks for writing this - I found it really moving and I think the lesson is a good one. I think you conveyed the value of moth wellbeing, and your respect for it, in a touching way.

I enjoyed this a lot, thanks !

If someone knows/is able to put me in touch with Mehdi Hassan, I'd be SUPER grateful

Answer by Kaleem25
1
0
1

Looking for potential co-founders for an Effective Zakat org.

I'm exploring launching a new org which aims at redirecting zakat to effective charities. The whole plan is extremely speculative at the moment (I'm currently funded to explore this idea, including looking for potential co-founders). I'm open to people from different backgrounds, locations, and experience levels. Ideally you'd be someone who is Muslim and has a decent amount of theological understanding around zakat, or have a history of working in Islamic Philanthropy. Fluent Arabic speakers would be a huge plus.

Hi Kaleem, I am really interested in this idea. I am a muslim with decent theological understanding around zakat and am fluent in arabic. Let's connect and discuss this more

FAW#2.

An interesting potentially high-impact intervention: banning dog meat production/trade in Indonesia.

I was surprised to find out that Indonesia produces/consumes ~1M dogs per year, given that it's ~89% Muslim, and dogs are absolutely not permissible to consume in Islam. For context, very quick googling and estimating leads me to believe that the number of dogs killed per year in Indonesia is ~half the number of cows consumed in Indonesia per year (nowhere near the ~700M chickens per year though).

I'd assume it'd be WAY easier to help push through a dog... (read more)

If dog meat is banned, they might just switch to chicken meat, which might be worse for animal welfare. Or beef, which would be better.

Leonie and Akhil, are there any results from this would could be shared?

This does answer the question and is much appreciated! Do you have any sources I can cite (other than the paper linked in your response) ?

1
Ian Turner
I can try to scare up some sources, but do you mind if I ask if there are particular claims that you are especially interested in?

I don't know what price or % of daily income would be unaffordable, but I think it would be very useful to know what that was so that I could use the number in a question to a theological authority.

I assume the standard that would be more widely useful would be "not available in local markets at any price".

Regarding the availability of nets, nets are definitely available to purchase, even in places that have universal distribution of bednets. It's not how most people get their nets though; the majority of households in Uganda, Guinea, Nigeria, and Togo (for example) got their nets from mass distributions. To hypothesize some reasons why one might buy nets even in the case of universal distribution — it might be to get more nets per household, nets of a larger size, nets for a new child, etc. In general I think we expect people buying nets to live in richer a... (read more)

yeah it answers the question - although I think for the purposes of leaning on this answer I'd probably want someone/something with reputation on the subject (no offence intended).

The point I'm trying to clarify is whether or not funding e.g. AMF means that people are getting something which they couldn't get otherwise. I don't think the idea that they might not choose to purchase them even if they're available is necessarily good enough in this instance.

The reason behind the question is to see whether or not I can apply the reasoning behind the ruling that "yes you can give zakat to a charity which provides free organ transplants to people who can't afford them" to something like AMF.

2
Ian Turner
By “couldn’t get otherwise”, do you mean “unaffordable”, or “not available in local markets at any price”? If the former, do you have a sense for how expensive would be too expensive?

Wow, this is amazing news. Thank you so much for all the hard work that must have gone into writing this book, I can’t wait to read it !

(Small, very reluctant point of correction: I think unfortunately, “The good it promises, the harm it does” is probably the first book focusing on EA and FAW (assuming we don’t consider Animal Liberation to be a book about EA, which I think is fair)).

thanks for this - I think I get it now. I think the points relating to the effects on zakat-donors and non-zakat donors are good ones, especially since I hadn't considered the effect on non-zakat donors a huge amount up until now.

With regards to Zakat donors: I don't think the majority of muslim donors would find this argument a reason not to donate. The thing they care most about is whether or not the entire amount of zakat they donate is reaching the hands of zakat-eligible recipients. There is a large amount of scholarship around the philosophy of zakat... (read more)

2
Brad West🔸
I think that Givedirectly, where it has free hands, will try to direct cash to where it can do the most good. If many of the world's poorest are being served by the Zakat program, this will probably affect choices to some extent at a macro or micro level. For instance, perhaps counterfactually to the Zakat-funded Bangladeshi program, such a program would have been funded with unrestricted funds (such unrestricted funds then being able to go elsewhere). But I have no special insight into Givedirectly, just the general observation that if you earmark funds for anything that would otherwise be covered by unrestricted funds, that simply frees up those funds for the org's marginal priorities. Re Zakat-donors: if they have no issue with their donations functionally benefiting non-Muslims too, that's great. I too would rather it all go under Givedirectly given its strengths.

Hi - good questions, and things I've been trying hard to find out.

  1. I think most scholars would say this is dubious but maybe acceptable depending on what the context is. I've come across mixed reactions when I've explained NI's model

  2. Its unideal and pretty uncommon - the vast majority of zakat is cash, and in rare cases its emergency supplies like food, water, and medical supplies in disaster regions.

  3. I haven't asked this question specifically to anybody (because I hadn't really considered it as an option) but my intuition from all the other discussi

... (read more)

Yarrow, there is a MASSIVE amount of writing on this topic - there is quite a lot of agreement but also (like many things in Islam) large points of disagreement.

I think for the purposes of EA/effective giving, in the simplest form:

  1. Zakat is a wealth-tax levied against Muslims above a certain wealth level and given to a small prescribed group of eligible recipients. Strictly, zakat has to be in the form of the transfer of ownership of cash or commodities.

  2. In the theology there are 8 permissible groups, only one of which I think we'd be able to target fo

... (read more)

Thanks Ian.

I agree with the three bullet points - using unrestricted or dedicated non-zakat donations to cover operating costs is likely the best way to do this. Additionally:

  1. Determining who is Muslim is a non-trivial and probably impossible thing to do, which is why I would probably just punt that to whichever external orgs we approach to get the program zakat- certified. They're likely just going to do what they did when they zakat certified GD's Yemen program, which is to look at the national or regional demographic data, as you suggested. This also

... (read more)

Hi Brad. Thanks for engaging with this quick take. I've read your comment multiple times and am struggling to understand what it means. I would appreciate if you could try and re-explain the second and third paragraphs of your comment for me.

5
Brad West🔸
Hi Kaleem, Sorry, I wrote my previous response quickly. My response regarded Ian’s proposal that GiveDirectly solve the problem by using Zakat funds to solely benefit Muslims and then using unrestricted funds to benefit non-Muslims (and operating expenses). The problem from the Zakat-funder's perspective is whether or not GiveDirectly would use those earmarked funds to “fung” with its unrestricted funds to benefit non-Muslims.  Let’s assume GiveDirectly has a goal of maximizing welfare with its money transfers. So, without a separate fund earmarked for Muslims, let’s say that there would be funding for a million ideal recipients (determined strictly by need, feasibility of conveying funds, and other strictly utilitarian factors), two hundred thousand of those happening to be Muslims and eight hundred thousand of those happening to be non-Muslims. Let’s modify the hypothetical to say that some of this funding for one hundred thousand of those million ideal recipients is earmarked for Muslims. GiveDirectly could dutifully deploy this funding for these hundred thousand Muslims. With its unrestricted funds for the remaining nine hundred thousand, GiveDirectly can achieve the same disbursement result by transferring to the 100,000 remaining Muslims in its ideal set and transferring to the 800,000 remaining non-Muslims.  From this hypothetical, if I donate an earmarked amount to benefit one thousand Muslims, GiveDirectly can shift its unrestricted fund to benefit 1,000 less Muslims and then it can benefit the next 1,000 people that would most benefit, regardless of religion. Because money is fungible, GiveDirectly can use the earmarked funds to benefit those Muslims it would have helped with unrestricted funds (because some of the ideal recipients on utilitarian grounds will happen to be Muslims) and this will free up other funds to do whatever GiveDirectly finds to be most marginally beneficial (including benefiting non-Muslims). Thus, even giving to a fund earmarke
Load more