All of Michael Noetel's Comments + Replies

Richard I really love your writing, but as a parent I find it so hard to just sit and read stuff. 95% of the forum's content I get via the podcast feeds. Now, I don't expect everyone to go full Experimental History or Joe Carlsmith and audio narrate each post, but unless you're wanting to keep things on Substack turf, you might consider cross-posting the full thing here (like Bentham's Bulldog did for the critique of the wired article). I don't ask this of everyone, so please consider this a compliment: I love your work and want it in my ears.[1] 

  1. ^

    Tha

... (read more)

This is a meta-level point, but I'd be very, very wary of giving any help to Hanania if he attempts (even sincerely) to position himself publicly as a friend of EA. He was outed as having moved in genuinely and unambiguously white supremacist political circles for years a while ago. And while I accept that repentance is possible, and he claims to have changed (and probably has become less bad), I do not trust someone at all who had to have this be exposed rather than publicly owning up and denouncing his (allegedly) past views of his own accord, especially... (read more)

One lens to look at this is less through the ‘we’re all similarly qualified’ like the AMA but more through the ‘we’re working with the same values’ or ‘we’re working on similar problems’ like the Institute of Public Administration Australia. These have no qualification requirements. Still they offer similar things to what ea communities try to do https://qld.ipaa.org.au/for-individuals/

2
Chris Leong
22d
Yeah, it's possible I'm taking a narrow view of what a professional organisation is. I don't have a good sense of the landscape here.

These examples at the end are interesting and worth me mulling over. I do get the sense that Greenpeace or the NAACP would do many of the things you do

That’s a good point. All AMA members have to meet certain criteria. I can see how ‘’8 week reading group” pales in comparison to a medical degree.

3
Michael Noetel
22d
One lens to look at this is less through the ‘we’re all similarly qualified’ like the AMA but more through the ‘we’re working with the same values’ or ‘we’re working on similar problems’ like the Institute of Public Administration Australia. These have no qualification requirements. Still they offer similar things to what ea communities try to do https://qld.ipaa.org.au/for-individuals/

I'll look into it. The census data part seems okay. Collecting a representative sample would be harder (e.g., literacy rates are lower, so I don't know how to estimate responses for those groups).

1
SebastianSchmidt
8d
That makes sense. We might do some more strategic outreach later this year where a report like this would be relevant but for now i don't have a clear use case in mind for this so probably better to wait. Approximately how much time would you need to run this?

Thanks Seb. I'm not that surprised—public surveys in the Existential Risk Persuasion tournament were pretty high (5% for AI). I don't think most people are good at calibrating probabilities between 0.001% and 10% (myself included).

I don't have strong hypotheses why people 'mostly support' something they also want treated with such care. My weak ones would be 'people like technology but when asked about what the government should do, want them to keep them safe (remove biggest threats).' For example, Australians support getting nuclear submarines but also s... (read more)

1
SebastianSchmidt
1mo
Thanks. Hmm. The vibe I'm getting from these answers is P(extinction)>5% (which is higher than the XST you linked). Ohh that's great. We're starting to do significant work in India and would be interested in knowing similar things there. Any idea of what it'd cost to run there?

As a social scientist, these lists are very helpful, thank you team. It's useful to be able to point students and colleagues to open questions that are immediately decision-relevant.

Thanks for the support Ben. I love what giving multiplier are doing and we entertained the idea down here but we have more restrictive charity regranting laws down here. My understand is that giving multiplier can basically just forward re-grants to the donor's target, but our read of the Aussie legislation is that we'd need to formally partner with every charity that a donor would want to choose.

Our strategy for marketing to non-EAs is to partner with Giving Green to support a Manager of Climate Giving for Giving Green Australia. Basically, we work closel... (read more)

Just wanted to +1 the appreciation for all your work over the years JJ

Thanks to all who attended this event. Such a great turnout. For more information about EAAE, or to donate, go to http://eaa.org.au/environment

my pledge pin is my most expensive possession I own...

Omg I'd never done those maths 😬

Good video Peter. Agree it’s a good introduction for a wide audience. Thanks for signal boosting.

I popped this script in via email a few weeks ago but didn't get confirmation of receipt. I know it's been a crazy few weeks so no need to review. Still, do you mind confirming whether it's 'in' or whether the contest is closed?

2
Writer
1y
Yes, I've received and read the script, and the contest is still open

Thank you for sharing this project. It looks great. A few minor comments and ideas. Wordpress is very flexible but requires lots of plugins to interface with each other for many functions to work. Consider chatting to Aqeel or JJ Hepburn from Sangro/AI Safety Support who recently used wordpress for a learning management system to see how they found it. Consider also using an existing platform with more pre-built features (e.g., Thinkific) where cross-compatibility might be less painful (see our uni EA fellowship site). At least at the start, these hel... (read more)

I really like this framing Gideon. It seems aligned with CEA's Core EA principles. I'd love EA to be better at helping people learn skills.  One of our working drafts for an EA MOOC focuses more on the those core principles and skills. Is something like this work-in-progress closer to what you had in mind?

Could Nonlinear Library or Perrin Walker do audio versions of these articles? 🙏

5
Guy Raveh
1y
Yesterday I listened to Kelsey Piper's review using the Google Assistant text-to-speech (which only works for web pages), and it worked pretty well. Only a couple words are mispronounced ("aye" for AI).

So in education 'agency' is often defined as 'agentic engagement'—basically taking ownership over your own learning. I couldn't find any good systematic reviews on interventions that increase agentic engagement. This is pretty weak evidence and might have a healthy dose of motivated reasoning (my end, and theirs), but people who have thought about agency for longer than I have seem to think...

In conclusion, the answer as to how teachers can support students’ agentic engagement is to adopt a significantly more autonomy-supportive classroom motivating style.

... (read more)
1
SebastianSchmidt
2y
That makes sense in the context of education. However, I'd add that agency also contains some components related to general ability (and perceived ability) to exert influence on the world in a way that's aligned with one's values. The section on what autonomy supportive educators tend to do is highly valuable. Appears quite related to coaching (although coaching is a much broader term).

Thanks for taking the time to add these really useful observation, Seb.

One downside to this approach is that it might lead to Goodharting and leading the teacher to go in "exploitation" mode.  E.g., I worry that I might become too attached to a specific outcome on behalf of the students and tacitly start to persuade (similar to some concerns expressed by Theo Hawkins) and/or neglect other important opportunities that might emerge during the program. How do you think of that risk?

 It's been a while since I read Theo's post so I might be missing th... (read more)

This is a useful list of interventions, some of which are mentioned in the post (e.g., quizzes; we've summarised the meta-analyses for these here). I think steps 1, 2 and 3 from the summary of the above post are the 'teacher focused' versions of how to promote deliberate practice (have a focus, get feedback, fix problems). Deliberate practice literature often tells learners how they should structure their own practice (e.g., how musicians should train).  Teaching to others is a useful way to frame collaboration in a way that makes it safe to not know ... (read more)

Classic Aird: great collection of links to useful resources. Thanks mate. Looking forward to meta-Aird: a collection of links to the best of Aird's collection of links.

Argh bugger, this conflicts with EAGx so won't make this but would love to be kept in the loop

What about 'card-carrying EAs'? Doesn't have the same dark connotations as "drank the kool-aid" and does somewhat exemplify the difference you're hinting at.

Maybe GWWC can start printing cards 😅

https://writingexplained.org/idiom-dictionary/a-card-carrying-member

I should clarify: RCTs are obviously generally >> even a very well controlled propensity score matched quasi-experiment, but I just don't think the former is 'bulletproof' anymore. The former should update your priors more but if you look at the variability among studies in meta-analyses, even among low-risk-of-bias RCTs, I'm now much less easily swayed by any single one.

Yeah these are interesting questions Eli. I've worked on a few big RCTs and they're really hard and expensive to do. It's also really hard to adequately power experiments for small effect sizes in noisy environments (e.g., productivity of remote/in-person work). Your suggestions to massively scale up those interventions and to do things online would make things easier. As Ozzie mentioned, the health ones require such long and slow feedback loops that I think they might not be better than well (statistically) controlled alternatives. I used to think RCTs we... (read more)

2
elifland
2y
Really appreciate hearing your perspective! On causal evidence of RCTs vs. observational data: I'm intuitively skeptical of this but the sources you linked seem interesting and worthwhile to think about more before setting an org up for this. (Edited to add:) Hearing your view  already substantially updates mine, but I'd be really curious to hear more perspectives from others with lots of experience working on this type of stuff, to see if they'd agree, then I'd update more. If you have impressions of how much consensus there is on this question that would be valuable too. On nudging scientific incentives to focus on important questions rather than working on them ourselves: this seems pretty reasonable to me. I think building an app to do this still seems plausibly very valuable and I'm not sure how much I trust others to do it, but maybe we combine the ideas and build an app then nudge other scientists to use this app to do important studies.

3 months on, and this has become one of the most valuable EA/Alignment/Rationality dissemination innovations I've seen. Has replaced almost all my more vapid listening. Would get through an extra 10-20 hours of content a week. Thank you Nonlinear/Kat/Emerson

5
Kat Woods
2y
I'm so glad to hear that! Shared it with the team to much party-parrot emoji reactions and totally made my day. Thank you for letting us know!

I'm sure you've read this paper that guides young psychologists like you in some useful directions: https://psyarxiv.com/8dw59/

If you're committed to mental health then the research agenda for the Happier Lives Institute is useful to consider: https://www.happierlivesinstitute.org/ or scaleable online interventions like those of Spencer Greenberg's team (see MindEase and UpLift: https://www.sparkwave.tech/)

If you're more flexible, then your skills from counselling psychology would be useful in movement building (because basically you learn how to be a warm... (read more)

1
Jon Massmann
2y
These are great, thank you! Would you mind saying what you switch your career to after counselling work?

Whatever happens with the discussions about copyright, I really hope this continues to exist. I listened to six forum posts at 5am today while walking a baby around to sleep... very good for parental mental health

3 months on, and this has become one of the most valuable EA/Alignment/Rationality dissemination innovations I've seen. Has replaced almost all my more vapid listening. Would get through an extra 10-20 hours of content a week. Thank you Nonlinear/Kat/Emerson

I spend a few years as a professional before coming back to do my PhD. I think what you're describing sounds like a good model. The only criteria some professionals struggle to meet is 'equivalent of honours'; that is, to get into a PhD you need to have completed a thesis before.

I understand what you're saying about the tension. As someone trained in psychology, there's a litany of papers that 'solve the problem of not understanding' with little or no 'problem solving' benefit.

Having said that, I think those incentives are changing. In the UK and Australia, universities are now being evaluated and incentivised based on how well they solve problems (e.g. https://www.arc.gov.au/engagement-and-impact-assessment). I think, in general, your motivation and career would not be hurt by doing things that focus on engagement with people who... (read more)

1
Michael_Wulfsohn
3y
Thanks for your detailed reply. Absolutely, there is some academic reward available from solving problems. Naively, the goal is to impress other academics (and thus get published, cited), and academics are more impressed when the work solves a problem.  You seem to encourage problem-solving work, and point out that governments are starting to push academia in that direction. This is great, and to me, it raises the interesting question of optimal policy in rewarding research. That is supremely difficult, at least outside of the commercialisable. My understanding is that optimal policy would pay each researcher something like the marginal societal benefit of their work, summed globally and intertemporally forever. How on earth do you estimate that for the seminal New Keynesian model paper? Governments won't come close, and (I imagine) will tend to focus on projects whose benefits can be more easily measured or otherwise justified. So we are back to the problem of misaligned researcher incentives. But surely a government push towards impact is a step in the right direction. Until our civilisation solves that optimal policy problem, I think academia will continue to incentivise the pursuit of knowledge at least partly for knowledge's sake. I wrote the post because understanding the implications of that has been useful to me.

Critical thinking about research, including what biases are most common, why they apply, and how to know if an intervention works: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook https://training.cochrane.org/online-learning

Great initiative @MichaelA. I'm not sure what a 'sequence' does, but I assume this means there'll be a series of related posts to follow, is that right?

3
MichaelA
3y
Yeah, I think it's basically EA Forum / LessWrong jargon for "series of posts".  There are 4 more posts to come in this sequence, plus ~2 somewhat related posts that I'll tack on afterwards, one of which I've already posted: Notes on EA-related research, writing, testing fit, learning, and the Forum

My little dude is only 2 but one of my best mates. Have never had more laughs than as a dad. But, never had more tears either. It's turbulent, but the highs are high.

4
Risto Uuk
3y
Yeah, I feel that too. My daughter is just 1 year and 9 months. We are constantly high-fiving and fist-pumping.

I'm a university professor (senior lecturer, is what we call it down under) and sport psychologist, so if ever you want me to speak to how involvement in your project can actually increase the quality of athletes' motivation and therefor performance, I can hopefully act as a credible source for an interesting angle to sell it.

0
Marcus Daniell
4y
Would love to! Have PM'd you. Cheers

So there's lots of small studies showing nudges work, but some studies say the same nudges are harmful. Instead, I'd recommend relying more upon evidence syntheses, when they're available. Some things that are 'strongly recommended' by theory and experts just don't stand up to the data (e.g., 'legitimising paltry contributions') because of counter-veiling forces (e.g., anchoring). A whole bunch of EAs finished this project earlier in the year to summarise all the evidence syntheses: https://psyarxiv.com/yxmva/ You might find it a useful summary.

0
Closed Limelike Curves
4y
Thanks for the source!

"Balance autonomy, competence, and relatedness"

These are the three most robust psychological needs. Let me start by outlining what these are, why most don't balance them, and the evidence for involving each.

By autonomy, I mean giving following the feeling that they're acting out of their own volition. They either have the freedom to act on what is important to them (e.g., choices over projects) or what they're doing is so aligned with their values that they don't need choice (e.g., doctors following evidence-based protocols).

By competence, I mean giving th

... (read more)