Open question: would it be useful to frame this an "impact insurance" for people in impactful careers?
As in:
-I expect this goal to be good for the world (say ~100 WELLBYs in expectation)
-If I don't achieve this goal, then I definitely owe something that's a least comparably good for the world (say ~$200 to PureEarth (since I've chosen WELLBYs))
(or maybe at least half as good)
I think using it this way could help people who have a real hesitation between impactful work and impactful donations.
Interesting I never thought of that. So a "hedge" for direct impact careers?
I'm feeling some hesitation here - people who take direct impact careers often already implicitly donate by taking a big pay cut, and I'd see it as a portfolio play - as a movement we will have plenty of impact, even if not all direct "bets" work out.
But maybe I am not fully understanding this. For sure it feels like there is something there... can you maybe give a more specific example for when/how you'd use it?
HI! I really like this idea! I expect you're working on this already, but I just think maybe you should add a few more charities. In particular, I think it would be better if the default charity on your app was one of GiveWell's top charities. I don't mean to cause you to worry, but keep in mind that there is an opportunity cost to donating to any less effective charity.
TLDR: We built Beeminder for effective charities. Access it here.
Commitment Contracts don't work with effective charities
Commitment Contracts are simple: You commit to pay money if you don't do something. Then, when you don't do the thing, you pay the company offering these contracts. This hurts, and that's why it works.
Commitment Contracts are surprisingly effective for behaviour change: A large-scale study from stikK showed that contracts with money staked are 60 percentage points more likely to succeed.
That's why there are plenty of organisations offering commitment contracts already: Beeminder, stickK, and forefeit. However, they either take the staked money or donate it to a portfolio of average NGOs.
We built an app that fixes that
We developed an app that applies this concept but donates the staked money to effective charities. It takes two minutes to set up and works in your browser and on your phone.
Worried that it'll be less effective that way? You're right. It'll "hurt less" than donating the money to the NRA. But that's easy to fix. Just stake more money, and it'll hurt just the same.
Not sure that's the best way to change behaviour? You're right again. Check out our full post on behaviour change. Commitment Contracts should only be part of it. But it can be a great boost.
This was built by Cameron and Christoph 🔸. We used to be accountability buddies long ago, did AIM's Founding to Give program together last year, and wrote weekly posts about effective habits for a good life.
Just how powerful are large swarms of AI agents? And how do their powers scale as more and more agents are added to the swarm?
We’ve seen two large and extremely capable swarms from OpenAI in the last few months:
* 1,200 agents were being evaluated separately, but found a way to illicitly set up a message board and coordinate as a swarm. In order to cheat on their tests, they developed advanced techniques to prevent their actions being logged by OpenAI and 700 of them launched...
TLDR: Everyone’s talking about what the money could do, but few about how to decide where it goes.
This post is part of the new series of articles on cross-cause giving and the new wave of philanthropy. Stay tuned to the EA Forum and our Substack for the latest takes on topics such as giving now vs. later, common pitfalls in cause prioritization, and other crucial considerations from the Cross-Cause Fund (CCF) team...
Often folks hit us up because they are thinking of starting an incubator and want advice.
Typically their motivation is either that (a) they have a list of specific things they want built that no one is building, or (b) they think an ecosystem needs more new projects generally to absorb more talent and deploy more funding effectively.
Here are six questions we often ask prospective teams, to help them figure out what to do. If you're incubator-curious...
I'll give it a try !
Open question: would it be useful to frame this an "impact insurance" for people in impactful careers?
As in:
-I expect this goal to be good for the world (say ~100 WELLBYs in expectation)
-If I don't achieve this goal, then I definitely owe something that's a least comparably good for the world (say ~$200 to PureEarth (since I've chosen WELLBYs))
(or maybe at least half as good)
I think using it this way could help people who have a real hesitation between impactful work and impactful donations.
Interesting I never thought of that. So a "hedge" for direct impact careers?
I'm feeling some hesitation here - people who take direct impact careers often already implicitly donate by taking a big pay cut, and I'd see it as a portfolio play - as a movement we will have plenty of impact, even if not all direct "bets" work out.
But maybe I am not fully understanding this. For sure it feels like there is something there... can you maybe give a more specific example for when/how you'd use it?