Although some of the jokes are inevitably tasteless, and Zorrilla is used to set up punchlines, I enjoyed it and it will surely increase concerns and donations for shrimp. I'm not sure what impression the audience will have of EA in general.  Last week The Daily Show interviewed Rutger Bregman about his new book Moral Ambition (which includes a profile of Zorrilla and SWP). 

Americans, we need your help to stop a dangerous AI bill from passing the Senate. What’s going on? * The House Energy & Commerce Committee included a provision in its reconciliation bill that would ban AI regulation by state and local governments for the next 10 years. * Several states have led the way in AI regulation while Congress has dragged its heels. * Stopping state governments from regulating AI might be okay, if we could trust Congress to meaningfully regulate it instead. But we can’t. This provision would destroy state leadership on AI and pass the responsibility to a Congress that has shown little interest in seriously preventing AI danger. * If this provision passes the Senate, we could see a DECADE of inaction on AI. * This provision also violates the Byrd Rule, a Senate rule which is meant to prevent non-budget items from being included in the reconciliation bill.   What can I do? Here are 3 things you can do TODAY, in order of priority: 1. (5 minutes) Call and email both of your Senators. Tell them you oppose AI preemption, and ask them to raise a point of order that preempting state AI regulation violates the Byrd Rule. * Find your Senators here. * Here’s an example of a call:  “Hello, my name is {YOUR NAME} and I’m a resident of {YOUR STATE}. The newest budget reconciliation bill includes a 10-year ban pre-empting state AI legislation without establishing any federal guardrails. This is extremely concerning to me – leading experts warn us that AI could cause mass harm within the next few years, but this provision would prevent states from protecting their citizens from AI crises for the next decade. It also violates the Byrd Rule, since preempting state AI regulation doesn’t impact federal taxes or spending. I’d like the Senator to speak out against this provision and raise a point of order that this provision should not be included under the Byrd Rule.” See here for sample call + email temp

[Note: I (the primary author) am writing this entirely in a personal capacity. Funding for the bounty and donations mentioned in this post comes entirely from personal savings and the generosity of friends and family. Colleagues at Open Philanthropy (my employer) reviewed this post at my request, but this project is completely unaffiliated with Open Philanthropy.]   In 2023, GiveWell reported that it received over $250M from more than 30,000 donors, excluding Open Philanthropy. I expect (though haven’t confirmed) that at least $50M of this came from unmatched retail donations, meaning from individuals who don’t work at a company that offers a donation match. I can’t help but hope that there may be some way to offer these donors a source of matching funds that wouldn’t otherwise go toward charitable causes. Over the last couple of years, friends and I have spent >100 hours looking into potential legal, collaborative corporate donation matching opportunities. I think there may be promising ways to partner with corporate donors, but I haven’t found a way forward that I am comfortable with, and I don’t think I’m the best person to continue work on this project. Some donors may be choosing to give through surrogates (friends who work at companies that match donations) without understanding the risks involved. My understanding is that there can be several (particularly if donors send surrogates money conditionally, e.g., by asking them to sign an agreement to give through their company’s match): * The surrogate might inadvertently violate their company’s terms for donation matching. * The surrogate, donor, or company might fail an IRS audit if they don’t correctly report the donations + match. * The surrogate or donor might be sued by the company. * The company might discontinue its matching program and/or claw back funds from recipient nonprofits. “Getting to yes” with a corporate partner in a completely legal, transparent, and good faith way could direct signi