We should shut down EA UK, change our mind
 

EA UK is hiring a new director, and if we don't find someone who can suggest a compelling strategy, shutting down is a likely outcome despite having ~9 months of funding runway.

Over the last decade EA in the UK has been pretty successful, Loxbridge in particular has the highest number of people involved in EA, there are multiple EA related organisations, and many people in government, tech, business, academia, media, etc who are positively inclined towards EA.

Because of this success (not that we're claiming counterfactual credit), there is less low hanging fruit for a national/city group to do.

For example:

• Conferences - EAG London and student summits are run by CEA
• Co-working - There are at least 3 different places to co-work (LEAH, LISA, AIM) for 100+ people, as well as many other orgs that have space for guests
• Student groups - A combination of Arcadia Impact and CEA
• Incubation of new organisations - AIM/CE
• Media outreach - Mainly done by the most relevant organisations/CEA

I'm not saying mission accomplished, but for EA specific community building in the UK, I think there will have to be a good understanding of the existing landscape and ideas for what is missing and is unlikely to be done by someone else.

"A few years ago, I began to rethink that approach. More recently, with the input from our board, I now believe we can achieve the foundation’s goals on a shorter timeline, especially if we double down on key investments and provide more certainty to our partners."

It seems it was more of a question of whether they could grant larger amounts effectively, which he was considering for multiple years (I don't know how much of that may be possible due to aid cuts).

Is there any data to back up the environmental movement growing and stalling around those times? It may have got a lot of media attention but it seems like the real gains on climate change were made by people who have been working in clean tech for decades and politicians that were already lobbying for various policies in the 2000s/2010s.

I imagine if you work in that field people will show interest in the topic, I'd be interested in if you know there is outsized interest in cultivated meat over other alt proteins.

I'm not sure I see any data in that LinkedIn post, do we know how sales have changed over time and price points for these products? I find this type of data more convincing. I'd be more interested in seeing global info, and looking at sales of various products, in the retail and business sectors to get a good sense of what is actually happening in plant based margarine vs margarine vs butter vs plant based butter market.


The Jacob Peacock article is about them being the same price, not significantly cheaper, which I think is the wrong way to think about it. Most examples historically of animal products being replaced have been because of big cost differences rather than cost parity (horses/cars, whales/oil, fur/other fabrics). That doesn't mean that people don't still ride horses, hunt whales or use fur, just that it is a much smaller percentage.

You mention that 'EA' should temper it's enthusiasm for cultivated meat. I'm not sure I have noticed this on the forum or in conversations, or at least not beyond enthusiasm for the idea of alternative proteins in general. Do you have a sense why you think cultivated meat enthusiasm is too high in EA?

I would also be sceptical of having your mind changed via survey data for dietary preferences when people already consume a lot of food that is manufactured in ways they say they are against. I think it would be more important to see whether alternative proteins (including cultivated meat) can become as tasty, convenient and significantly cheaper than animal products.

I think EA and Nazism are quite different (in many ways). EA doesn't have a membership policy, and EA has a very wide range of philosophies, including opposing views, that people can believe in whilst still doing EA related work (positive vs negative utilitarianism, virtue ethics, deontology, consequentialism, some people care about animals some don't, a very large range of time discounts, etc).

As in the original article about EA as a question, it makes less sense philosophically and practically to have EA as an identity.

Maybe what you're noticing is people who haven't been asked about their 'EA' status before, giving the answer they would have always given.

Part of it may be that before FTX there was already a strong norm for people to not identify as EA (EA as a question). And that has only got stronger since. At least in the UK a lot of people working in EA areas wouldn't call themselves EA including myself, pre 2020.

There has been quite a bit written about democracy, I'm not sure if it fits your description but some of those posts might be related.

Effektiv Spenden also has a 'Defending Democracy' fund.

There's a write up here (if you mean the same thing), but it was about 30 people.