This is a special post for quick takes by Darren McKee. Only they can create top-level comments. Comments here also appear on the Quick Takes page and All Posts page.
Has the past two months seen more harm done (edit: by the new administration) than the totality of good EA has done since it's existence?
I don't really get the framing of this question.
I suspect, for any increment of time one could take through EAs existence, then there would have been more 'harm' done in the total rest of world during that time. EA simply isn't big enough to counteract the moral actions of the rest of the world. Wild animals suffer horribly, people die of preventable diseases etc constantly, formal wars and violent struggles occur affecting the lives of millions. There sheer scale of the world outweighs EA many, many times over.
So I suspect you're making a more direct comparison to Musk/DOGE/PEPFAR? But again, I feel like anyone wielding using the awesome executive power of the United States Government should expect to have larger impacts on the world than EA.
True, I was vague and should have specified the new administration.
If people do think that this is true, as it seems obvious to you, then perhaps EA should have allocated resources differently?
I don't really get the framing of this question.
I suspect, for any increment of time one could take through EAs existence, then there would have been more 'harm' done in the total rest of world during that time. EA simply isn't big enough to counteract the moral actions of the rest of the world. Wild animals suffer horribly, people die of preventable diseases etc constantly, formal wars and violent struggles occur affecting the lives of millions. There sheer scale of the world outweighs EA many, many times over.
So I suspect you're making a more direct comparison to Musk/DOGE/PEPFAR? But again, I feel like anyone wielding using the awesome executive power of the United States Government should expect to have larger impacts on the world than EA.