Crossposted to Less Wrong
‘Like most of life’s dangers, the dangers of artificial intelligence are not easily identified from the armchair.’
J Dmitri Gallow
Epistemic status
I’m not an expert in this field, and herein I make some sweeping generalisations educated guesses about the overall...
With the AI windfall, mental health may be taken increasingly seriously by mainstream EA. There’s increasingly room to explore the cause area and answer some of the biggest uncertainties; at the same time, costs of the most effective interventions are continuing to fall. StrongMinds is now treating for ~$35, about a third of GiveWell’s best guess from a few years ago, and is expected to...
At the NIH, Jay Bhattacharya did a lot to reduce animal experimentation and thus reduce animal suffering. As far as ChatGPT can tell, this seems to be completely ignored by the Effective Altruism forum.
Marty Makary's FDA is also taking it's steps to reduce the need of animal testing for FDA approvals.
Is this simply, because Effective Altruists don't like the Trump administration so they can't take the win of MAHA bringing contrarians into control of health policy that do things like caring more about reducing animal suffering and fighting the replication crisis?
I don't think so.
Some less tribalistic hypotheses I can think of:
But tribalistic explanations could be a factor too (e.g. MAHA has anti-science vibes, and EAs like to stay on the pro-science side).
(This is probably not the most constructive feedback, but my initial reaction to this short form was that it felt like a right-wing analog of left-wing "Why don't the EAs tweet about Gaza?"-style criticisms).