edited: haven't published to the forum in a long time but I'm not surprised to get a little pushback, for some reason my writing infuriates people (?) ; adding to clarify ... this is not an attack, I come in peace, and was simply curious if this had been brought up elsewhere. Maybe I missed a memo, being out here on the fringes of the movement, but as someone with a background in psychology/branding and passion for film, I thought it was an interesting point. 

Resisting the urge to delete this, didn't know this was not the type of thing to bring up on the forum, my mistake. I'm hesitant to actually edit the writing because that feels intellectually dishonest. I unbolded things to remove any sense of 'aggression' in the tone.  My tone in writing this is 100% calm, earnest and like "hey I noticed these things and am concerned, what do you think?" 

I know the movement may feel enticed to forgo optics, but ironically it seems like now would be the better time to care about them. For example, the forthcoming "The Altruists" at Netflix on FTX and now Luca Guadagnino's "Artificial" just wrapped (which is very specifically focused on the 5-day board firing of Sam Altman and will obviously cover the EA/AI safety movements). 

Knowing how antagonistic OpenAI is being toward any kind of policy work limiting AI companies development, and the only groups working against those efforts are EA and AIS.... having widespread negative representation in entertainment may hinder all future work of these movements. 

Luca's hot right now - he just came off the success of Zendaya's Challengers and Oscar contender Queer, the movie's got a stocked cast, and he's angling it as a comedy which is the best way to reach people on subjects that might go over their heads (with all the tech and philosophical jargon). While specific casting is being kept secret, it's not hard to think EAs will feature in this film - especially the board members involved. 

We can probably guess what angle they're going to take - EAs are a bunch of eccentric techies worrying about some doomsday god - (because EA, back in the day, refused to draw a boundary with the rationality movement in the Bay area - it is now often lumped in together with Eliezer and MIRI). I mean you tell me - who do you think Jason Schwartzman is playing based off these on-set images? 

This won't just be a blip of a movie, it's going to be milked to reach wide audiences. Why do I think that? New feature on Thrive Capital founder Joshua Kushner just dropped - he's behind all the tech unicorns, Stripe, Airbnb and yes, OpenAI. The piece is long and fascinating backstory about his family, but the interview with Joshua centers around the events of the OpenAI firing...(it's brief so just control find for 'effective altruist' on the page).  

It suggests Kushner was behind that rapid media campaign that turned the public sentiment, in the tech space and the public at large, against EAs instantaneously (remember all the "turbulent priests" and "Altman is so amazing" articles?). These people have billions and cross-industry connections that go back to their days at ivy leagues (Kushner was at Harvard same time as Mark Zuckerberg...oh and so was Simon Rich, the writer of the Artificial movie). 

Why bring this up? Giving up on public relations is not the attitude that's needed here. If we care about the work more than anything, then we have to care about how the public perceives this movement. That doesn't mean micromanaging through polished PR pieces... but it does mean putting a human face on the movement (which CEA and Zach Robinson have already been doing fantastically well over the last year) and effectively communicating what EA is (and what it isn't - by drawing a clear distinction between it and auxiliary movements). Which is why joining with the AI Safety Movement right now would water down the messaging of this movement's purpose, which is still not crystal clear to the public at large. 

Second note, If Kushner could push out an overnight media assault campaign (with the help of even more insider tech force), then this Artificial movie, I'm speculating, is meant to serve as the final nail in the coffin. The best way to burnish the EA movement (not just with Silicon Valley, but across a global audience of philanthropic donors, students and political leaders), is not to destroy it, but just make it enough of a joke in everyone's eyes, that no one takes it seriously ever again. Given this possibility, has anyone who might be featured in these works considered pursuing a Life Rights lawsuit or even forming a Class Action to delay or block the release of these films? 

They're hiding the cast list of these projects to prevent any legal drama around defamation or libel, until after its released. In the entertainment world, even bad press helps fuel the flames behind a film and gets it more attention. By then the damage is done, the 'false' or 'misleading' narrative is out in the world, and you're left scrambling to pick up the pieces. 

Both projects come out in 2026. All the momentum EA has been rebuilding since FTX may hit a wall. This seems like a worthwhile effort to at least investigate options, maybe even get support from Open Phil or CEA. From a social psychology perspective, showing the world we don't care about our image is exactly the attitude they expect from eccentric outsiders - the 'righteous contrarianism' that often makes people turned off by silicon valley and academics. If the work is what matters most, then we're not just fighting for people's perception of ourselves, we're also protecting and re-emphasizing the importance of these causes.