EA Forum Bot Site
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by mariekedev
3 min read 18

115

Building effective altruismCareer choiceCommunityEffective givingCollections and resourcesEffective altruism educationEffective altruism fundingEffective altruism groups
Frontpage
Show all topics

TLDR: I've assembled a mindmap of all EA (-related) entities I could find. You can access it at tinyurl.com/eamindmap. If I missed or misrepresented anything: leave a note (in the mindmap) and I'll add it or correct it. I've also added other existing lists of orgs to this post. 

Context

Starting my position at EA Netherlands as a co-director, I was advised by EA Pathfinder (now Successif) to make an overview of the EA space. In this way it would be easier to onboard, support community members and follow conversations. 

I made this mindmap of EA(-related) entities and this quickly got out of hand. I asked around, whether such overviews already exists. There were a few: 
 

Overview of EA organizations[1]

Somehow I still ended up sharing my mindmap with others, as it gives a clear visual overview of the orgs per main category or cause area. I know it is not perfect, but it is easy to maintain and people seem to like it. I was asked multiple times to add it to the forum, so here it is.

Disclaimer 

  • Organisation inclusion doesn't imply my endorsement.
  • The branches (the categories or cause areas) are a bit arbitrary, as some organisations serve multiple categories or cause areas. For me the aim was to get an overview, not a perfect mindmap.
  • It's incomplete. I'm still adding orgs weekly. Feel free to add notes (in the mindmap) where this overview can be corrected or orgs can be added or deleted.
  • I use the words orgs, organisations and entities in this post. That is because 'orgs' is more accessible and clear as a word, but the entities aren't all official organisations.  
  • I changed the title of the mindmap from EA(-aligned) to EA(-related), due to this comment. I'm still a bit uncomfortable with it, because there are many more EA-related orgs which won't fit all into this mindmap (see 80k jobboard), but it seems more right (for example: I added the AI labs..). I try to add only the orgs that self-identify as EA-aligned or the ones that many EAs refer to. 

How to use this

  • However you like :) the left side contains more meta entities and the right side contains more object-level (cause area related) orgs.
  • I heard people use it in order to quickly get an overview of existing entities in one category (like EA career support or biorisk).
  • Sometimes I use it in an intro presentation to make people more aware of the global EA space.
  • Zoom in/zoom out: Pinch or Ctrl + mousewheel; Navigate: Spacebar + move with left mouse button.

To post or not to post

I had reservations about sharing the mindmap, considering some organisations might not wish to be associated with EA. Guided by @Diego Oliveira's advise, I've published it but will retract if any substantial concerns arise due to its posting.

Furthermore, it might not be ideal that a random person is making mindmaps. I might stop maintaining it tomorrow, which further increases entropy, without adding value. I'm aware of this and I wouldn't mind it at all if an official EA org mindmap (or otherwise clear overview) would replace mine or if I was asked to remove everything. 

tinyurl.com/eamindmap
  1. ^

    Thanks to @Irene H from EA Eindhoven: Masterdocs of EA community building guides and resources!  

115

0
0
2

Reactions

0
0
2
Mentioned in

More posts like this

Comments18
Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Luke Freeman 🔸8
3
0

This is pretty useful thanks! Have bookmarked 😀 

I can imagine myself opening this up myself and sharing it a bunch!

Reply
mariekedev3
0
0

Thanks Luke! I'm glad you and others found it useful and I'm honored that you even bookmarked it!

Reply
Linda Linsefors5
2
0

There are lots of more AI Safety orgs and initiatives. Not sure if would be practical to add all.

See here for manybof them: aisafety.world

Reply
mariekedev3
0
0

Thanks! I added 'Many more, see aisafety.world' to the branch. 

Are there particular orgs and initiatives that you'd put in the branch itself as well that are currently missing, so they stand out more? 

Reply
Linda Linsefors6
1
0

I think the specific list of orgs you picked is a bit ad-hock but also ok. 

It looks like you've chosen to focus on reperch orgs specifically, plus overview resources. I think this is a resonable choice. 

Some orgs that would fit on the list (i.e. other research orgs), are
* Conjecture
* Orthogonal
* CLR
* Convergence
* Aligned AI
* ARC

There are also several important training and support orgs that is not on your list (AISC, SERI MATS, etc). But I think it's probably the right choice to just link to aisafety.training, and let people find variolous programs from there. 

I'm confused why there is an arrow from The Future Society to aisafety.world.
aisafety.world is created and maintained be Alignment Ecosystem Development

Reply
mariekedev1
0
0

Thanks, this is great. I added all the orgs you listed and  removed the confusing arrow. I'll go over the list with a few AI experts from our community to check if the selected orgs/initiatives can be better selected and organised. 

Reply
Sean Lawrence4
1
0

This is a fantastic overview, thanks for sharing it! 
There are a few more 'Groups by profession' orgs in this post. (Although, the specifics of some of the groups may be out of date now). 
 

Reply
mariekedev1
0
0

That post is amazing! I added the groups to the mindmap. I met an architect who didn't know how to incorporate EA in her career and this post has a whole google doc with options! 

Reply
Seren Kell3
2
0

Thank you for sharing this - super helpful! I wasn't sure if this is primarily intended to be just representative/give a snapshot, versus an exhaustive overview of the ecosystem. If the latter, then GFI's company database could be helpful to link to for the alt protein companies in the Netherlands (you can filter by country). 

Reply
mariekedev1
0
0

Oh wow, 50 alt protein companies in the Netherlands alone! And one very promising I know (Farmless) isn't even on the list. Thanks a lot for sharing; very exciting. I have added a link to the database, as the mindmap would otherwise explode.  

Reply
AronM3
2
0

Thanks for creating this! Interesting to see the overview. Also interesting to see the challenges of having to categorize all these different efforts.

I would like to suggest that ALLFED be placed differently. At ALLFED we are looking at a wide range of risks that could disrupt / threaten our global food system. Some of which are fairly certain to occur this century (such as Coinciding Extreme Weather Events leading to Multiple Breadbasket Failure). 

I feel like a category of "Global Catastrophic Risks (GCRs)" right next to x-risks might be the most fitting for ALLFED.

Reply
mariekedev3
1
1

Thanks, that makes much more sense! Changed it. 
Feel free to add other improvements in the mindmap self with comments. 

Reply
Dr Dan Epstein2
0
0

This is great, do you have a table version of this?

Reply
mariekedev1
0
0

Thanks! I don't, but you are the second person asking me. For a table overview or EA(-adjecent) orgs I would recommend using https://ea-internships.pory.app/orgs and using the filters. 

Reply
Jax G2
0
0

Thank you for sharing this Marieke.  Even if close to impossible to be comprehensive, it has great value in the categorisations used and provision of example organisations.  Much appreciated.

Reply
mariekedev1
0
0

:) I appreciate your appreciation!

Reply
AnonymousTurtle1
0
0

Why are Vivid and Mental Health Navigator crossed out?

Reply
mariekedev3
0
0

Tbh I don't know.. (I didn't cross them out). I have checked out the websites and see that 'Mental Health Navigator' is now 'MentNav', so I changed the name. Vivid seems still active, but I'm not sure. If anyone knows, let me know! 

Reply
More from mariekedev
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 7m read
 · 
Tl;dr: In this post, I describe a concept I call surface area for serendipity — the informal, behind-the-scenes work that makes it easier for others to notice, trust, and collaborate with you. In a job market where some EA and animal advocacy roles attract over 1,300 applicants, relying on traditional applications alone is unlikely to land you a role. This post offers a tactical roadmap to the hidden layer of hiring: small, often unpaid but high-leverage actions that build visibility and trust before a job ever opens. The general principle is simple: show up consistently where your future collaborators or employers hang out — and let your strengths be visible. Done well, this increases your chances of being invited, remembered, or hired — long before you ever apply. Acknowledgements: Thanks to Kevin Xia for your valuable feedback and suggestions, and Toby Tremlett for offering general feedback and encouragement. All mistakes are my own. Why I Wrote This Many community members have voiced their frustration because they have applied for many jobs and have got nowhere. Over the last few years, I’ve had hundreds of conversations with people trying to break into farmed animal advocacy or EA-aligned roles. When I ask whether they’re doing any networking or community engagement, they often shyly say “not really.” What I’ve noticed is that people tend to focus heavily on formal job ads. This makes sense, job ads are common, straightforward and predictable. However, the odds are stacked against them (sometimes 1,300:1 — see this recent Anima hiring round), and they tend to pay too little attention to the unofficial work — the small, informal, often unpaid actions that build trust and relationships long before a job is posted. This post is my attempt to name and explain that hidden layer of how hiring often happens, and to offer a more proactive, human, and strategic path into the work that matters. This isn’t a new idea, but I’ve noticed it’s still rarely discussed op
 ·  · 3m read
 · 
I wrote a reply to the Bentham Bulldog argument that has been going mildly viral. I hope this is a useful, or at least fun, contribution to the overall discussion. Intro/summary below, full post on Substack. ---------------------------------------- “One pump of honey?” the barista asked. “Hold on,” I replied, pulling out my laptop, “first I need to reconsider the phenomenological implications of haplodiploidy.”     Recently, an article arguing against honey has been making the rounds. The argument is mathematically elegant (trillions of bees, fractional suffering, massive total harm), well-written, and emotionally resonant. Naturally, I think it's completely wrong. Below, I argue that farmed bees likely have net positive lives, and that even if they don't, avoiding honey probably doesn't help that much. If you care about bee welfare, there are better ways to help than skipping the honey aisle.     Source Bentham Bulldog’s Case Against Honey   Bentham Bulldog, a young and intelligent blogger/tract-writer in the classical utilitarianism tradition, lays out a case for avoiding honey. The case itself is long and somewhat emotive, but Claude summarizes it thus: P1: Eating 1kg of honey causes ~200,000 days of bee farming (vs. 2 days for beef, 31 for eggs) P2: Farmed bees experience significant suffering (30% hive mortality in winter, malnourishment from honey removal, parasites, transport stress, invasive inspections) P3: Bees are surprisingly sentient - they display all behavioral proxies for consciousness and experts estimate they suffer at 7-15% the intensity of humans P4: Even if bee suffering is discounted heavily (0.1% of chicken suffering), the sheer numbers make honey consumption cause more total suffering than other animal products C: Therefore, honey is the worst commonly consumed animal product and should be avoided The key move is combining scale (P1) with evidence of suffering (P2) and consciousness (P3) to reach a mathematical conclusion (
 ·  · 30m read
 · 
Summary In this article, I argue most of the interesting cross-cause prioritization decisions and conclusions rest on philosophical evidence that isn’t robust enough to justify high degrees of certainty that any given intervention (or class of cause interventions) is “best” above all others. I hold this to be true generally because of the reliance of such cross-cause prioritization judgments on relatively weak philosophical evidence. In particular, the case for high confidence in conclusions on which interventions are all things considered best seems to rely on particular approaches to handling normative uncertainty. The evidence for these approaches is weak and different approaches can produce radically different recommendations, which suggest that cross-cause prioritization intervention rankings or conclusions are fundamentally fragile and that high confidence in any single approach is unwarranted. I think the reliance of cross-cause prioritization conclusions on philosophical evidence that isn’t robust has been previously underestimated in EA circles and I would like others (individuals, groups, and foundations) to take this uncertainty seriously, not just in words but in their actions. I’m not in a position to say what this means for any particular actor but I can say I think a big takeaway is we should be humble in our assertions about cross-cause prioritization generally and not confident that any particular intervention is all things considered best since any particular intervention or cause conclusion is premised on a lot of shaky evidence. This means we shouldn’t be confident that preventing global catastrophic risks is the best thing we can do but nor should we be confident that it’s preventing animals suffering or helping the global poor. Key arguments I am advancing:  1. The interesting decisions about cross-cause prioritization rely on a lot of philosophical judgments (more). 2. Generally speaking, I find the type of evidence for these types of co
Recent opportunities in Building effective altruism
12
What are some high-impact ways for newcomers to get involved in Effective Altruism?
Q
Alexander Deliyanni
· · 1m read
1
1
115
What's your experience with elitism in EA? [Survey]
Q
Yi-Yang
· · 2m read
70
70
61
AIM Grantmaking Program for Funders: Upcoming Cohorts
Judith Rensing, Joey🔸, CE
· · 2m read
0
0
View more