That's a fair distinction. And it is also true that this isn't the main point of your post, so not an issue if it isn't 100% accurate.

In response to "EA doesn't recommend becoming a politician":

80000 does recommend policy work. https://80000hours.org/skills/political-bureaucratic/

EA forum posts making similar recommendations seem common.

It is hard to say if EA-as-a-monolith recommends any particular thing, but I think many EAs would encourage (competent and electable) folks to consider a policy career.

This implies planning to have children is immoral. You get morally penalized for the suffering of your future children, but are not morally rewarded for their joy.

This seems like a large bullet to bite.

I think this is basically the same theory as: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/je5TiYESSv53tWHC9/utilitarians-should-accept-that-some-suffering-cannot-be-1

Amen that this is both an exciting opportunity, and feels depressing. I didn't get into EA to buy warm fuzzies, but I do miss them.

EA 1.0 vs EA 2.0 is worse terminology than GHD vs longtermism. GHD and longtermism is more descriptive, and therefore less likely to confuse folks.

SMBC by Zach Weinersmith is doing a great job of conveying AI Safety memes more widely.

Relevant comics: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/speech https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/safe https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/ai-17 https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/ai-15

I would love to see his take on an illustrated AI Safety book, like 'Open Borders' meets 'If anyone builds it, everyone dies'.

In very broad strokes, 20% GiveWell & 80% AI Safety. About half of the AI Safety funds are to 501c4s.

Prior years were about 95% GiveWell or GiveWell top charities.

Feel free to DM me and I can share a CSV of my donations (sharing it publicly still feels kinda weird).

Over 40% of my lifetime donations happened this month. I expect to never be able to make that statement again. These are weird times.

For context on why it is extra weird, I've been donating since 2015 and have always donated 10% of my salary each year (or more).

I think you're selling yourself short at 300-500 USD. Gemini estimates 1600-4200 USD (for 3 reviewers total), Opus 400-1000 USD (for a single reviewer spending only 4-6 hours). I endorse those estimates.

Prompt for those curious: If academic peer reviews were compensated at market rate (ie, relative to industry pay for someone with the relevant expertise), how much would it cost to have a typical academic paper reviewed?