I don't know of a list like this, but you could go through AI safety fundamentals governance track and look for key concepts. Potentially look through relevant papers and posts as well.

Ah, makes sense. Thanks!

What does PI stand for?

I myself don't have too much to add, but in this 80,000 hours podcast with Will MacAskill they do discuss it. (if you don't want to listen to the whole podcast, you can look up the transcript.

I, like probably most reading this, am someone who strongly values reason and believes that helping others is a good thing.

This is why many people choose to 'join' EA: They find EA somewhere, think that the ideas make sense and seem true, presumably because it aligns well with their values and consider it right. The reason-based approach makes sense to them.

But isn't the procedure similar for following any community? Imagine I am looking for meaning, so when I stumble upon a guru which aligns with (some of) my values, I integrate myself into that community. Similarly so for political parties, a football club, a weekly art gathering, etc.

I might as well have different beliefs and values. So these questions follow:

Does EA seem like the right movement to me because there is something inherently right about EA, or just because EA fits my initial values and beliefs? In other words, is EA just built on the belief in potentially arbitrary assumptions (e.g helping others is good), or is there actual substantiation for these assumptions?

I'm curious to hear thoughts about this, I might dig much deeper into this and potentially create a post for the Red Teaming Contest. There seems to be a lot more to be said and I've already got some ideas, but I wanted to find out whether this would be fruitful.

Small suggestion, instead of writing SF and DC, I'd put the full name instead of the abbreviations 'SF' and 'DC'. I'd guess SF means San Francisco and DC Washington DC, but it's not very open and clear to people outside the United States. (Especially when it's an EA global event!)

Good article!

However, the footnotes at the end of the article require some formatting work, at least for me (Windows laptop, Brave browser). Overall I'm also really impressed by the quality of the website, it's great for the professional outlook of the organization :)