4 karmaJoined


The link to Less Wrong goes to instead.

It looks like all the footnote links in this post go to a non-existent file instead of to the footnotes at the end.

I think it's funny that I have been involved in EA since before the term came into popular use, but I can't remember it ever not being called "effective altruism."

> Given all the uncertainties, do you honestly think that in 10 years' time the choice of which charity(ies) to fund will be significantly clearer than it is today?

I think it will be significantly clearer in 2-3 years. GiveWell only started fairly recently; for charities outside of GiveWell's field of vision, especially those that focus on non-human animals, serious charity evaluation (i.e. Effective Animal Activism) has existed for less than two years IIRC.

We're learning rapidly, and we still have a lot to learn. In all likelihood, there exist opportunities much better than the ones we currently know about.

> the optimal charity can never be chosen with 100% certainty

True, but I may have 20% confidence in my current favorite charity and believe that by next year I will have 40% confidence in my favorite charity. That's an expected-value return of 100% in one year, which is worth waiting for. (I just made up those numbers, but I expect reality to look something like that.)