This is a special post for quick takes by Tobias Häberli. Only they can create top-level comments. Comments here also appear on the Quick Takes page and All Posts page.
Sorted by Click to highlight new quick takes since:

We've extended application to the 2025 Q1 Pivotal Research Fellowship!

We think this could be a great opportunity for many on the Forum!
Deadline: Tuesday 26. November.

"Profits for investors in this venture [ETA: OpenAI] were capped at 100 times their investment (though thanks to a rule change this cap will rise by 20% a year starting in 2025)."


I stumbled upon this quote in this recent Economist article [archived] about OpenAI. I couldn't find any good source that supports the claim additionally, so this might not be accurate. The earliest mention I could find for the claim is from January 17th 2023 although it only talks about OpenAI "proposing" the rule change.

If true, this would make the profit cap less meaningful, especially for longer AI timelines. For example, a 1 billion investment in 2023 would be capped at ~1540 times in 2040.

I've talked to some people who are involved with OpenAI secondary markets, and they've broadly corroborated this.

One source told me that after a specific year (didn't say when), the cap can increase 20% per year, and the company can further adjust the cap as they fundraise.

I'd like to be able to search the "80000 hours" and the "Effective Altruism" LinkedIn groups for members from my city. The group member lists are only searchable for names.

I think it could be a good way to contact local EA-aligned people who aren't on our radar. 
Is there any workaround for doing this?

I believe you can do this search with a subscription to a paid LinkedIn subscription, like Recruiter Lite.

Yep, you can. 

(I thought you could do it on the unpaid version too but I just checked and can't see it. I specifically remember having the functionality to use specific search filters restricted to only people within certain groups when I had recruiter Lite though.)

The "Personal Blogposts" section has recently become swamped with [Event] posts.
Most of them are irrelevant to me. Is there a way to hide them in the "All Posts"-view?

Moonshot EA Forum Feature Request 

It would be awesome to be able to opt-in for "within-text commenting" (similar to what happens when you enable commenting in a google doc) when posting on the EA Forum. 

Optimally those comments could also be voted on.

I have good news for you! LessWrong has developed this feature. You can access the feature by going to your settings and checking "opt-in to experimental features."

You might think that this will lead to a "party-of-1" dynamic, but due to the way it's implemented (check out the above post), quoted text in comments will lead to side comments for you.

is it April's Fool?

[comment deleted]3
0
0

I stumbled on this flow chart from 2015 about how different value and empirical judgements might change what cause areas we'd want to work on and with which methods:
http://globalprioritiesproject.org/2015/09/flowhart/

It's a bit dated by now. But I think an updated version of this could be very valuable for newcomers to EA.

[comment deleted]1
0
0
Curated and popular this week
Ben_West🔸
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
> Summary: We propose measuring AI performance in terms of the length of tasks AI agents can complete. We show that this metric has been consistently exponentially increasing over the past 6 years, with a doubling time of around 7 months. Extrapolating this trend predicts that, in under a decade, we will see AI agents that can independently complete a large fraction of software tasks that currently take humans days or weeks. > > The length of tasks (measured by how long they take human professionals) that generalist frontier model agents can complete autonomously with 50% reliability has been doubling approximately every 7 months for the last 6 years. The shaded region represents 95% CI calculated by hierarchical bootstrap over task families, tasks, and task attempts. > > Full paper | Github repo Blogpost; tweet thread. 
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
Epistemic status: highly certain, or something The Spending What We Must 💸11% pledge  In short: Members pledge to spend at least 11% of their income on effectively increasing their own productivity. This pledge is likely higher-impact for most people than the Giving What We Can 🔸10% Pledge, and we also think the name accurately reflects the non-supererogatory moral beliefs of many in the EA community. Example Charlie is a software engineer for the Centre for Effective Future Research. Since Charlie has taken the SWWM 💸11% pledge, rather than splurge on a vacation, they decide to buy an expensive noise-canceling headset before their next EAG, allowing them to get slightly more sleep and have 104 one-on-one meetings instead of just 101. In one of the extra three meetings, they chat with Diana, who is starting an AI-for-worrying-about-AI company, and decide to become a cofounder. The company becomes wildly successful, and Charlie's equity share allows them to further increase their productivity to the point of diminishing marginal returns, then donate $50 billion to SWWM. The 💸💸💸 Badge If you've taken the SWWM 💸11% Pledge, we'd appreciate if you could add three 💸💸💸 "stacks of money with wings" emoji to your social media profiles. We chose three emoji because we think the 💸11% Pledge will be about 3x more effective than the 🔸10% pledge (see FAQ), and EAs should be scope sensitive.  FAQ Is the pledge legally binding? We highly recommend signing the legal contract, as it will allow you to sue yourself in case of delinquency. What do you mean by effectively increasing productivity? Some interventions are especially good at transforming self-donations into productivity, and have a strong evidence base. In particular:  * Offloading non-work duties like dates and calling your mother to personal assistants * Running many emulated copies of oneself (likely available soon) * Amphetamines I'm an AI system. Can I take the 💸11% pledge? We encourage A
 ·  · 2m read
 · 
Hi everybody! I'm Conor. I run the 80,000 Hours Job Board. Or I used to. As of today — April 1 — we are becoming Job Birds! We've been talking to users for the last few years about making this change, and people have overwhelmingly been in favour (remember, there are six or more birds for every human on Earth). Whether it's the daily emails asking me to finally switch, or the flocks of people accosting me at conferences to urge a migration to Job Birds, the demand is overwhelming! Luckily, the wait is over! I've included an FAQ below of the most common questions we receive. FAQ * Do these birds have jobs? * In a sense, no. In another, preferred sense, definitely! They have roles in ecological niches. * What's a good bird to get started with? * The peregrine falcon. * What's the theory of change? * Birds are fascinating creatures. * Birds are the only living animals with feathers. * Birds have hollow bones, which help facilitate flight. * Some bird species, such as parrots and corvids, display remarkable intelligence. * What was the question again? * Caw! Caw! * I have concerns about wild animal suffering. How does Job Birds intend to navigate promoting birds of prey? * The humans behind Job Birds share these concerns. Unfortunately, birds of prey we've spoken to overwhelmingly ascribe to an incompatible, sort of Avi-Nietzschean value system. Owl contractors are in the process of building a moral parliament tool in order to manage these conflicting normative claims. * I worry that sharing birds with people isn't as impactful as sharing jobs. * Okay, but consider this: you can click the media buttons to even hear the sounds of the bird! * I would like to do good with my career. Can Job Birds help me with that? * Users report that job hunting can be stressful and time-intensive. In light of this, we at Job Birds recommend breaking up your job hunts with some time learning about the wonders of over 1,000 bird species at 80,000