Hide table of contents

The Centre for Effective Altruism will be organizing and supporting conferences for the EA community all over the world for the remainder of 2023, including the first-ever EA conferences in Poland, NYC and the Philippines. 

We currently have the following events scheduled:

EA Global

EAGx

  • EAGxWarsaw | (June 9–11) | POLIN
  • EAGxNYC | (August 18–20) | Convene, 225 Liberty St.
  • EAGxBerlin | (September 8–10) | Urania
  • EAGxAustralia | (September 22–24, provisional) | Melbourne
  • EAGxPhilippines | (October 20–22, provisional)
  • EAGxVirtual | (November 17–19, provisional)

Applications for EAG London, EAG Boston, EAGxWarsaw and EAGxNYC are open, and we expect applications for the other conferences to open approximately 3 months before the event. Please go to the event page links above to apply. Please note again that applications to EAG London close 11:59 pm UTC Friday 5 May.

If you'd like to add EA events like these directly to your Google Calendar, use this link.

Some notes on these conferences:

  • EA Globals are run in-house by the CEA events team, whereas EAGx conferences are organized independently by local community builders with financial support and mentoring from CEA.
  • EA Global conferences have a high bar for admission and are for people who are very familiar with EA and are taking significant actions (e.g. full-time work or study) based on EA ideas.
  • Admissions for EAGx conferences are processed independently by the EAGx conference organizers. These events are primarily for those who are newer to EA and interested in getting more involved and who are based in the region the conference is taking place in (e.g. EAGxWarsaw is primarily for people who are interested in EA and are based in Eastern Europe).
  • Please apply to all conferences you wish to attend once applications open — we would rather get too many applications for some conferences and recommend that applicants attend a different one than miss out on potential applicants to a conference.
  • Travel support funds for events this year are limited (though will vary by event), and we can only accommodate a small number of requests. If you do not end up receiving travel support, this is likely the result of limited funds, rather than an evaluation of your potential for impact. When planning around an event, we’d recommend you act under the assumption that we will not be able to grant your travel funding request (unless it has already been approved). 
  • Find more info on our website.

Feel free to email hello@eaglobal.org with any questions, or comment below. You can also contact EAGx organisers using the format [location]@eaglobalx.org (e.g. warsaw@eaglobalx.orgnyc@eaglobalx.org).

 

Comments


No comments on this post yet.
Be the first to respond.
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
Summary Reading full research (with a complete reference list) This article examines how voluntary governance frameworks in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and AI domains can complement each other to create more effective AI governance systems. By comparing ISO 26000 and NIST AI RMF, I identify: Key findings: * Current AI governance lacks standardized reporting mechanisms that exist in CSR * Framework effectiveness depends on ecosystem integration rather than isolated implementation * The CSR ecosystem model offers valuable lessons for AI governance Main issues identified: 1. Communication barriers between governance and technical implementation 2. Rapid AI advancement outpacing policy development 3. Lack of standardized metrics for AI risk assessment Recommendations: 1. Develop standardized AI risk reporting metrics comparable to GRI standards 2. Create sector-specific implementation modules while maintaining baseline comparability 3. Establish clear accountability mechanisms and verification protocols 4. Build cross-border compliance integration  Understanding ISO 26000: A Model for Effective Policy Ecosystems The Foundation and Evolution of ISO 26000 ISO 26000, established in 2010, represents one of the most comprehensive attempts at creating a global framework for social responsibility. Its development involved experts from over 90 countries and 40 international organizations, creating a global standard. Unlike narrower technical frameworks, ISO 26000 takes a holistic approach to organizational accountability, recognizing that an organization's social and environmental impact directly affects its operational effectiveness. What makes ISO 26000 particularly interesting is its ecosystem integration. The framework doesn't operate alone - it's part of a sophisticated web of interconnected standards, reporting mechanisms, and regulatory requirements. This integration isn't accidental; it's a deliberate response to the limitations of volunt
 ·  · 9m read
 · 
Crossposted from my blog which many people are saying you should check out!    Imagine that you came across an injured deer on the road. She was in immense pain, perhaps having been mauled by a bear or seriously injured in some other way. Two things are obvious: 1. If you could greatly help her at small cost, you should do so. 2. Her suffering is bad. In such a case, it would be callous to say that the deer’s suffering doesn’t matter because it’s natural. Things can both be natural and bad—malaria certainly is. Crucially, I think in this case we’d see something deeply wrong with a person who thinks that it’s not their problem in any way, that helping the deer is of no value. Intuitively, we recognize that wild animals matter! But if we recognize that wild animals matter, then we have a problem. Because the amount of suffering in nature is absolutely staggering. Richard Dawkins put it well: > The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In fact, this is a considerable underestimate. Brian Tomasik a while ago estimated the number of wild animals in existence. While there are about 10^10 humans, wild animals are far more numerous. There are around 10 times that many birds, between 10 and 100 times as many mammals, and up to 10,000 times as many both of reptiles and amphibians. Beyond that lie the fish who are shockingly numerous! There are likely around a quadrillion fish—at least thousands, and potentially hundreds of thousands o
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
This piece, from @Garrison, @Lauren Gilbert and @tomwein, is really great quick summary of the US foreign aid pause, focused on PEPFAR (the US funded AIDs reduction effort).  The most affecting aspect of the piece, for me, was the prognoses for people who would no longer receive drugs from the programme: > Perhaps those in the most immediate danger are the children of HIV-positive mothers. PEPFAR currently supports around 680,000 pregnant women with ARV treatment—without access to these drugs, some 20-40 percent of them will transmit HIV to their babies. Without ARV treatment, about half of those infants will die within their first two years of life, most within the first few months. We could very well return to the world of the mid-2000s, where AIDS is once again a death sentence for a large percentage of those infected with HIV. > > Nor would the consequences of ending PEPFAR stay in Africa. In up to 20 percent of individuals who inconsistently take ARVs, HIV becomes drug-resistant. It would not be long before drug-resistant HIV reached the United States, which could undermine decades of progress in HIV prevention and treatment domestically. I say this is the "most shareable" piece I've seen because it succeeds (as much as possible) in being non-partisan. The subtitle mentions US "soft power", and the title "Trump Has Put George W. Bush’s Lifesaving Legacy in Danger" gives some kudos to Bush. This is the best piece I've seen to send to a sceptical/ republican relative. This issue is extremely important and, therefore, very emotive, so it's easy to fall into writing polemic about it. I really appreciate this piece for maintaining an objective tone without being whataboutist.