FWIW I would be a regular reader of Nuno's monthly (or some other interval) forum digest. Also think that having a number of other people (potentially with complementary profiles) could be valuable. Given the depth d breadth of EA/EA Forum these days, trying to find the "common denominator of relevance" in the form of a single digest will result in a digest that is of limited usefulness for most readers.
Some of the section ideas are great, in particularly "underupvoted underdogs".
Yeah, these posts have some things in common - they're potentially offensive, but they actually say novel or interesting things.
On the technical side, the EA Forum team could consider analysing who upvotes these posts and whether there is a basic for increasing their upvote strength from a more objective standpoint.
On the cultural side, I wonder what causes people to downvote here. Is it an "I disagree"? "I think it would be bad for people to see this post? Or "This post is not personally interesting to me"? Maybe if people voted more based on personal interest, we would get more stuff like this.
Using TikTok to indoctrinate the masses to EA (a, -5 upvotes). Although the post's title is terrible, the videos (a) referred to struck me as both witty and edgy. The author also has 14k followers and 1M likes on TikTok, which seems no small feat.
Thanks, I wouldn't have read the post or watched the videos without your rec.
Nothing original, but wanted to make a separate comment to say I really like this and look forward to future ones! It feels like we are reaching the stage where curation is necessary, but as Nora said I think it's valuable to have multiple options
Imagine a tabloid to the EA Forum digest's weather report. This publication gives an opinionated curation of EA forum posts published during April 2022, according to my whim. I probably have a bias towards forecasting, longtermism, evaluations, wit, and takedowns.
On occasion, a few people discuss a topic at some length in the EA forum, going back and forth and considering different perspectives across a few posts. There is a beauty to it.
After some thought I have decided that the descriptor that best fits the role altruism plays in my life, is that of a central purpose. A purpose can be a philosophy and a way of living. A central purpose transcends a passion; even considering how intense and transformative a passion can be. It carries a far deeper significance in one’s life. When I describe EA as my purpose, it suggests that it is something that my life is built around; a fundamental and constitutive value.
Of course, effective altruism fits into people’s lives in different ways and to different extents. For many EAs, an existing descriptor adequately captures their perspective. But there are many subgroups in EA for whom I think it has been helpful to have a more focused discussion on the role EA plays for them. I would imagine that a space within EA for purpose-driven EAs could be particularly useful for this subset, while of little interest to the broader community.
In contrast, Eric Neyman's My bargain with the EA machine (a) explains how someone who isn't quite as fanatically altruistic established his boundaries in his relationship with the EA machinery:
I’m only willing to accept a bargain that would allow me to attain a higher point than what I would attain by default – but besides that, anything is on the table.
...
I really enjoy socializing and working with other EAs, more so than with any other community I’ve found. The career outcomes that are all the way up (and pretty far to the right) are ones where I do cool work at a longtermist office space, hanging out with the awesome people there during lunch and after work.
Note that there is a tension between creating inclusive spaces that would include people like Eric and creating spaces restricted to committed altruists. As a sign of respect, I left a comment on Eric’s post here.
Jeff Kaufman reflects on the increasing demandingness in EA (a). In response, a Giving What We Can (GWWC) pledger explains that he just doesn't care (a) all that much what the EA community thinks about him. He writes (lightly edited for clarity): "my relative status as an EA is just not very important to me... no amount of focus on direct work by people across the world is likely to make me feel inadequate or rethink this... we [GWWC pledgers] are perfectly happy to be by far the most effectively altruistic person we know of within dozens of miles".
Leo writes an update to the Big List of Cause Candidates (a), which gathers many of the novel cause area ideas people have been suggesting on the EA forum since early 2021.
Of the April fools (a) posts, Half Price Impact Certificates (a) tickled my brain. The post offers £20 worth of impact for £10, and notes that "the certificates are a form of stable currency, as they are pegged to the British pound, and so the impact isn't subject to volatility."
Nicole Noemi gathers some forecasts about AI risk (a) from Metaculus, Deepmind co-founders, Eliezer Yudkowsky, Paul Christiano, and Aleja Cotra's report on AI timelines. I found it helpful to see all these in the same place.
mpt7 writes Market Design Meets Effective Altruism (a) analyzing the charity ecosystem from a market perspective. The standpoint in the post could be a fruitful perspective from which to generate new mechanisms that EA might want to use.
In my career I have worked for 18 years as a structural engineer and project manager in senior roles at small, niche companies. I've been fully remote for several years, have worked with teams on five continents, and have always worked hard to excel as a people manager and to produce rigorous technical work and robust, efficient systems under challenging conditions.
Through EA volunteering work and other recent non-EA work I have been assessed as experienced, engaged, and self-directed in my operations work. I received a single response from the six applications and was removed from consideration there before an interview.
... it does seem like there could be an incongruity here - I do have several years of relevant experience, I am strongly EA aligned, and I didn't receive responses from five applications.
Leftism virtue cafe (a)'s shortform is very much worth reading. I particularly enjoyed:
If such a warning shot occurs, is it appropriate to infer the responses of governments from their responses to other potential x-risk warning shots, such as COVID-19 for weaponized pandemics and Hiroshima for nuclear winter?
To the extent that x-risks from pandemics has lessened since COVID-19 (if at all), what does this suggest about the risk mitigation funding we expect following AI x-risk warning shots?
Do x-risk warning shots like Hiroshima trigger strategic deterrence programs and empower small actors with disproportionate destructive capabilities by default?
rileyharris (a) posts their thesis about normative uncertainty. I'm on the fanatical utilitarianism side, so I just read the summary in the introduction, but I thought it was worth a shoutout.
Keen criticism
Rohin Shah (a) rants about bad epistemics on the EA forum:
Reasonably often (maybe once or twice a month?) I see fairly highly upvoted posts that I think are basically wrong in something like "how they are reasoning", which I'll call epistemics. In particular, I think these are cases where it is pretty clear that the argument is wrong, and that this determination can be made using only knowledge that the author probably had (so it is more about reasoning correctly given a base of knowledge)...
niplav argues for rewarding Long Content (a), and criticizing the recent $500k blog prize. Uncharacteristically enough, it received a thoughtful answer (a) by the target of his criticism. Niplav then retracted his post.
DID THEY NOT SEE THE IRONY OF PUTTING OUT A PRIZE LOOKING FOR BLOGS FOCUSED ON LONGERMISM WITH POSTS THAT STAND THE TEST OF TIME, BUT EXCLUDE ANY BLOG OLDER THAN 12 MONTHS? AM I GOING CRAZY?
Forethought Foundation researcher pummels popular (a) Climate Change alarmist.
billzito (a) talks about whether having "despair days" set aside for criticism would be a good idea and shares some struggles with knowing whether criticisms are welcome.
Underupvoted underdogs
Go Republican, Young EA! (a, 69 upvotes): "Young effective altruists in the United States interested in using partisan politics to make the world better should almost all be Republicans. They should not be Democrats, they should not be Greens, they should be Republicans."
Josh Morrison calls for research (a, 40 upvotes) for an ambitious biosecurity project: getting the US to issue an Advanced Market Commitment for future covid vaccines.
Thus both the campaign’s object-level goal (accelerating coronavirus vaccines) and meta-goal (expanding the long-term use of advanced market commitments) have major EA benefits beyond reducing COVID disease burden.
In Avoiding Moral Fads? (a, 23 upvotes), Davis Kingsley introduces the concept of a moral fad, gives previous examples (recovered memory therapy, eugenics and lobotomy), and asks about what the EA community could do to not fall prey to moral fads.
Using TikTok to indoctrinate the masses to EA (a, -5 upvotes). Although the post's title is terrible, the videos (a) referred to struck me as both witty and edgy. The author also has 14k followers and 1M likes on TikTok, which seems no small feat.
Effective Altruism Isn't on TV. (a, 11 upvotes): "Internet Archive lets you search the TV captions of major news programs back to 2009... Here’s how often effective altruism and charity evaluators were mentioned... RT (Russia Today) provided the most mentions of effective altruism.."
According to my preliminary model, the altruistic investing portfolio should ultimately allocate 5–20% on a risk-adjusted basis to mission-correlated investing. But for the current EA portfolio, it's better on the margin to increase its risk-adjusted return than to introduce mission-correlated investments.
I appreciated this summary (a) of The case for strong longtermism.
I also appreciated Replaceability versus 'Contextualized Worthiness' (a). It seems like a valuable concept for those who struggle with the thought of being replaceable. Sadly, the post doesn't have an upvote button.
Adam Shimi opens An Incubator for Conceptual Alignment Research Bets (a, 37 upvotes): "I’m not looking for people to work on my own research ideas, but for new exciting research bets I wouldn’t have thought about."
This is the third in a sequence of posts taken from my recent report: Why Did Environmentalism Become Partisan?
Summary
Rising partisanship did not make environmentalism more popular or politically effective. Instead, it saw flat or falling overall public opinion, fewer major legislative achievements, and fluctuating executive actions.
Public Opinion...
I think right now EAs might be making a significant mistake by paying insufficient attention to the political realm. As EAs we tend to figure out what’s most impactful for us to work on and focus hard. That’s great! But there are various actions that are ‘non-delegatable’ - the extent to which an individual can do the action is limited (like voting, going to a protest, making hard money contributions to particular campaigns). It might be useful if we were all more in the habit of doing variou...
This post presents the executive summary from Giving What We Can’s impact evaluation for 2025. At the end of this post we share links to more information, including the full report and...
FWIW I would be a regular reader of Nuno's monthly (or some other interval) forum digest. Also think that having a number of other people (potentially with complementary profiles) could be valuable. Given the depth d breadth of EA/EA Forum these days, trying to find the "common denominator of relevance" in the form of a single digest will result in a digest that is of limited usefulness for most readers.
Some of the section ideas are great, in particularly "underupvoted underdogs".
Thanks Nora. Note that you can in fact sign up.