I found this article quite interesting and well written, thank you for the contribution.
Here's a couple considerations I have not seen brought up:
1. You write: "Supplements can be expensive and difficult to obtain, especially EPA/DHA and certain carninutrients."
I agree that algae omega 3 supplements are quite expensive, on the range of 15-20 eur/month or more. Reading this I was hoping for a cheaper way to supplement that would still be ethical. However, sardines and anchovies (at least where I live) are still several times more expensive than just supplementing. For someone who is mostly worried about omega-3s, cost wise it would not make sense to switch from supplements to whole fish.
I did a quick calculation using the available cheapest fish (canned sardines in oil) from my local Rewe for 15.44 eur/kg, and these omega 3 algae oil supplements: https://norsan.de/shop/omega-3-vegan/ (picked because the manufacturer undergoes independent testing). Assuming 0.9mg combined EPA/DHA per 100g for the fish, my result is that a daily dose of 400mg combined EPA/DHA would cost 26ct per day via algae oil, and 62ct per day with whole fish.
2. The amount of fish one needs to consume
If I assume that 400mg of combined EPA/DHA per day would be sufficient intake, then I need to consume around half a tin of sardines (45g) per day. That sounds a little much to be honest, and seems harder to integrate into my diet than just adding 1ml of algae oil to my food, especially given the strong fishy taste of sardines/anchovies (that might not be to everyone's taste) and would be harder to mask than a small amount of oil. Given that you argue against supplements partly on grounds of it being hard to remember to take, this seems a valid point to mention.
3. Protein content
In general, despite there being rightful discussion about meat prices being far too low, animal products are still per kg quite expensive compared to vegan protein sources like lentils and beans, so I wouldn't recommend someone switch to fish for the protein mostly. Assuming my local supermarket's prices, the cheapest sardine protein is almost on par with protein from the cheapest vegan fake meat brand I could find, and more expensive than smoked tofu, canned chickpeas/kidney beans/brown lentils, TVP and mixed nuts or peanuts in terms of protein content.
Note that I'm not saying it isn't worth it, just leaving this comment to add to the discussion. I just naively assumed from the post that because sardines are "cheap" fish, they would be cheaper than other sources. Once I did the math, I'm less convinced than before that it's worth it.
There are of course still other considerations, as you have explained extensively:
Fish have nutritional benefits other than omega-3s, which would together be much more costly and arduous to supplement if one were to consider that worth doing
Even if one doesn't make themselves eat a whole tin of fish every other day, you'd still get some health benefits from a lower dose of omega-3s
FWIW, I found the article somewhat cringy, partly because of the references to pick-up artist culture that don't include the disclaimers I'd expect for practices such as negging: it ends up sounding like the OP endorses the practice.
The other part is that the tone of the article sounds wildly overconfident to me given the evidence presented. A strongly counterintuitive finding needs more justification than a link to an outside source IMO. I'd have taken away more with more in-text explanations and less overall points made.
(Commenting on this very old post because no one else seemed to have made the point, which I think is important to mention here to prevent a failure mode.)
I agree with the general point made. The specific examples in this post made me uncomfortable, though.
I'd emphatically warn against disregarding personal enjoyment in a calculation like this. Mental health is crucial to doing good and too often disregarded. In fact, I'd be careful with seeing every part of your life as instrumental to The One Goal of saving the world. It makes a lot of sense to do so from a philosophical viewpoint, but it's disregarding the fact that we're humans with meaty brains not built to internalise that kind of viewpoint to the deepest core.
If you're feeling like you're making a sacrifice, I recommend you stop doing the thing that made you feel that way. Chances are you're more susceptible to burnout than you think you are.
That said, it can still make sense to avoid very dangerous activities or substitute them with less dangerous ones. It's also possible to frame this in terms of personal motivations instead, if one prefers that (e.g. "I really don't want to go skiing because I might fall and break my leg, which would be very painful. I'll go hiking instead.").
It will definitely be possible to open new rooms. Actually, every Complice user can do this already via https://complice.co/rooms/.
For non-Complice users, there will be a bunch of existing "breakout" rooms once the EA Study Hall is officially open. I think it's a great way to use a room! As I have a Complice account, I can also open a specific named room for a team wanting to work on something for a longer period of time. There is no qualitative difference between a "generic" breakout room and a special team room, though, so I guess it'd be more cosmetic / keeping non-team EAs from popping in.
Actually, I will give an ignite talk at EA Global Oxford that is extremely relevant to this topic. This is the short pitch [edit: not so short anymore]:
Malcolm Ocean and I are working to set up a co-working space for EAs based on the format of the LW Study Hall. Just like the LWSH, which has been around for >2 years now, it will be a 24/7 web-chat with optional video streaming where people work on their own projects, probably in pomodoros and chat during the breaks.
Why does this solve your problem?
If this becomes as well frequented as the LWSH (which seems plausible given the success of the LWSH which has been stably frequented while being on a buggy platform with little to no official moderation), it will create a network of more or less regular users who know each other and can refer people within the network. Over 2 years, I've personally met more than 200 people via the LWSH.
Since Malcolm will host the site, he can also easily add functionalities. I've suggested adding a "project board" or similar to delegate/search for tasks, or we could connect the site to one of the existing boards. It will later also be possible to not only announce to other users of the chat what you're currently working on, but also other info, e.g. "looking for web designer". Finally, you can just meet there to co-work on EA projects remotely.
How is this different from .impact's chat rooms?
(I haven't been in these chatrooms before, so I don't know how well frequented they are or what their chat experience is. These are my experiences with other rooms/the LWSH.)
The video seems to be a key factor in creating the feeling of "I'm interacting with a human being". Plus, since Malcolm hosts the site, he'll do support and add more features. And you'll get a nudge to be productive while you are around. Win-win!
When will this be up?
The current plan is to launch the hall within 2 weeks after EA Global (that is, by mid-September). Malcolm or I will post here again then.
Also, if you're at EA Global, do come to my ignite talk. It'll have screenshots to show what the site looks like, and you'll hear more. Or, if you miss the talk, talk to me! I'm one of the people in the blue staff shirts. :)
I found this article quite interesting and well written, thank you for the contribution.
Here's a couple considerations I have not seen brought up:
1. You write: "Supplements can be expensive and difficult to obtain, especially EPA/DHA and certain carninutrients."
I agree that algae omega 3 supplements are quite expensive, on the range of 15-20 eur/month or more. Reading this I was hoping for a cheaper way to supplement that would still be ethical. However, sardines and anchovies (at least where I live) are still several times more expensive than just supplementing. For someone who is mostly worried about omega-3s, cost wise it would not make sense to switch from supplements to whole fish.
I did a quick calculation using the available cheapest fish (canned sardines in oil) from my local Rewe for 15.44 eur/kg, and these omega 3 algae oil supplements: https://norsan.de/shop/omega-3-vegan/ (picked because the manufacturer undergoes independent testing). Assuming 0.9mg combined EPA/DHA per 100g for the fish, my result is that a daily dose of 400mg combined EPA/DHA would cost 26ct per day via algae oil, and 62ct per day with whole fish.
2. The amount of fish one needs to consume
If I assume that 400mg of combined EPA/DHA per day would be sufficient intake, then I need to consume around half a tin of sardines (45g) per day. That sounds a little much to be honest, and seems harder to integrate into my diet than just adding 1ml of algae oil to my food, especially given the strong fishy taste of sardines/anchovies (that might not be to everyone's taste) and would be harder to mask than a small amount of oil. Given that you argue against supplements partly on grounds of it being hard to remember to take, this seems a valid point to mention.
3. Protein content
In general, despite there being rightful discussion about meat prices being far too low, animal products are still per kg quite expensive compared to vegan protein sources like lentils and beans, so I wouldn't recommend someone switch to fish for the protein mostly. Assuming my local supermarket's prices, the cheapest sardine protein is almost on par with protein from the cheapest vegan fake meat brand I could find, and more expensive than smoked tofu, canned chickpeas/kidney beans/brown lentils, TVP and mixed nuts or peanuts in terms of protein content.
Note that I'm not saying it isn't worth it, just leaving this comment to add to the discussion. I just naively assumed from the post that because sardines are "cheap" fish, they would be cheaper than other sources. Once I did the math, I'm less convinced than before that it's worth it.
There are of course still other considerations, as you have explained extensively:
I hope that's helpful to someone :)
FWIW, I found the article somewhat cringy, partly because of the references to pick-up artist culture that don't include the disclaimers I'd expect for practices such as negging: it ends up sounding like the OP endorses the practice.
The other part is that the tone of the article sounds wildly overconfident to me given the evidence presented. A strongly counterintuitive finding needs more justification than a link to an outside source IMO. I'd have taken away more with more in-text explanations and less overall points made.
(Commenting on this very old post because no one else seemed to have made the point, which I think is important to mention here to prevent a failure mode.)
I agree with the general point made. The specific examples in this post made me uncomfortable, though.
I'd emphatically warn against disregarding personal enjoyment in a calculation like this. Mental health is crucial to doing good and too often disregarded. In fact, I'd be careful with seeing every part of your life as instrumental to The One Goal of saving the world. It makes a lot of sense to do so from a philosophical viewpoint, but it's disregarding the fact that we're humans with meaty brains not built to internalise that kind of viewpoint to the deepest core.
If you're feeling like you're making a sacrifice, I recommend you stop doing the thing that made you feel that way. Chances are you're more susceptible to burnout than you think you are.
That said, it can still make sense to avoid very dangerous activities or substitute them with less dangerous ones. It's also possible to frame this in terms of personal motivations instead, if one prefers that (e.g. "I really don't want to go skiing because I might fall and break my leg, which would be very painful. I'll go hiking instead.").
Note that you do not (nor will you ever) need to sign up for Complice to use this chat.
Thanks Nino. :)
I'm so looking forward to meeting everyone today! (And tomorrow, and the day after...)
It will definitely be possible to open new rooms. Actually, every Complice user can do this already via https://complice.co/rooms/.
For non-Complice users, there will be a bunch of existing "breakout" rooms once the EA Study Hall is officially open. I think it's a great way to use a room! As I have a Complice account, I can also open a specific named room for a team wanting to work on something for a longer period of time. There is no qualitative difference between a "generic" breakout room and a special team room, though, so I guess it'd be more cosmetic / keeping non-team EAs from popping in.
Actually, I will give an ignite talk at EA Global Oxford that is extremely relevant to this topic. This is the short pitch [edit: not so short anymore]:
Malcolm Ocean and I are working to set up a co-working space for EAs based on the format of the LW Study Hall. Just like the LWSH, which has been around for >2 years now, it will be a 24/7 web-chat with optional video streaming where people work on their own projects, probably in pomodoros and chat during the breaks.
Why does this solve your problem? If this becomes as well frequented as the LWSH (which seems plausible given the success of the LWSH which has been stably frequented while being on a buggy platform with little to no official moderation), it will create a network of more or less regular users who know each other and can refer people within the network. Over 2 years, I've personally met more than 200 people via the LWSH. Since Malcolm will host the site, he can also easily add functionalities. I've suggested adding a "project board" or similar to delegate/search for tasks, or we could connect the site to one of the existing boards. It will later also be possible to not only announce to other users of the chat what you're currently working on, but also other info, e.g. "looking for web designer". Finally, you can just meet there to co-work on EA projects remotely.
How is this different from .impact's chat rooms? (I haven't been in these chatrooms before, so I don't know how well frequented they are or what their chat experience is. These are my experiences with other rooms/the LWSH.) The video seems to be a key factor in creating the feeling of "I'm interacting with a human being". Plus, since Malcolm hosts the site, he'll do support and add more features. And you'll get a nudge to be productive while you are around. Win-win!
When will this be up? The current plan is to launch the hall within 2 weeks after EA Global (that is, by mid-September). Malcolm or I will post here again then.
Also, if you're at EA Global, do come to my ignite talk. It'll have screenshots to show what the site looks like, and you'll hear more. Or, if you miss the talk, talk to me! I'm one of the people in the blue staff shirts. :)