I'm Director of Special Projects at 80,000 Hours. My role changes quarter-to-quarter but currently I work in four areas (in decreasing order of the amount of time I spend on them):
If summaries are editable, it could be nice to keep the same length limit so that they don't balloon during editing.
Here to help! 😛
I'm guessing a secondment is not a common term in the US?
What is their level of familiarity with machine learning and/or computer science?
Thanks for doing this - I found it helpful! Am I correct in thinking that under 'Among all respondents' under 'Average usefulness ratings:' the category> 80k: 2.6 +/- 0.1is just the 80k podcast and not all of 80k? If so one could change it to:> 80k podcast: 2.6 +/- 0.1
Yep, kudos to Will for the huge effort he’s put into the launch as well. I understand that many of the key media pieces came as a result of relationships he’s developed over the years.
I think Abie Rohrig and the broader team have been crushing it with the launch of What We Owe The Future. So so much media coverage and there are even posters popping up in tube stations across London!
In case it's helpful, the first thing below the title on the job board says:>Some of these roles directly address some of the world’s most pressing problems, while others may help you build the career capital you need to have a big impact later.
I'd be interested in any ideas you had for communicating more clearly that a bunch of the roles are there for a mix of career capital and impact reasons. Giving our guess of the extent to which each role is being listed for career capital vs impact reasons isn't feasible for various reasons unfortunately.
>it kind of worries meIs that because you think the job board shouldn't list career capital roles, because it wasn't obvious that the roles were career capital-related, or something else?
I agree with this and I appreciate you writing this up. I've also been mentioning this idea to folks after Michelle Hutchinson first mentioned it to me.