Alternative protein work does not involve a direct focus on welfare, but it equally seems to not involve a direct focus on advocacy. For PR-reasons, something involving anti-cruelty might be a good term.
The last I read about Integrated Information Theory was Scott Aaronsson's criticism of it. Has his arguments been addressed, because I found it very compelling?
I would be careful about psycholigical explanations for followers of the EA movement committing fraud. It might be due to ends-justify-the-means thinking, but other possibilities, such as EA alignment being a useful tool to faciliate fraud, are also possible.
At least on Twitter I felt that EA followers gave quite a lot of attention to SBF in particular. It certainly was positive PR for him and his companies, but I think an obvious risk for the movement.
I had no inkling the problems with FTX, but I had was somewhat surprised to see the crypto influence on the EA movement. Even absent fraud crypto currency businesses seemed to be financially risky, and also posing a PR-problem.
I wish Giving What We Can's donation page had my credit card number saved. Would remove a slight moment of annoyance each month.
There is a lot of EA content on Twitter. It can't replace this forum for serious debate, but for someone like me who mainly consumes EA content to maintain motivation long-term it does well enough.
For people with math/technical background the easiest way to express certain ideas may be in a mathy way.
From animal EAs in the US there is talk about upcoming Supreme court case where California import restrictions on pork produced to lower standards are likely to be overturned. A sad turn of events if it happens. Also find it annoying that some activists are trying to ally it with larger left-wing cause, and warn it will lead to general race to bottom when it comes to regulations. As someone who is more right-wing on many issues I am not very worried about race to bottom when it comes to labor market regulation. I also don't see how it is tactically smart to tie defense of animal welfare standards to larger project of ending domestic free trade in US. SC is never going to write an opinion that would allow Californa to ban import from states with lower minimum wage, and that would also be a step much too far for the Biden adminstration and most Democrats, yet animal-friendly lawyers on Twitter seem completely unconcerned to suggest that this is the principle they want.
Would this be specifically violence against women and girls in poor countries, or globally?