Random point of data: I know it's less exotic but with this budget you could work quite decently from Paris's close suburbs, in France.

Same here. Ping @Rahman Shanq :)

Agreed! One nuance though: I'm not familiar with the "time-to-results" that we can expect from such investments, but it seems plausible to me that it takes >1 year for them to deliver. So, results could potentially not show up before the 2028 report.

I think the discussion about how we should think about working with governments is very important. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Nick!

Congratulations on creating this! It feels like quite a natural progression. Will you share the curriculum's details publicly when the paint is dry?

Current community builders should also think of their work more in terms of the superstructure, rather than just motivating and directing people towards impactful careers

I think most European, national EA groups try to balance the expectations of proofs of impact from funders (like "we contributed strongly to <X> people applying to MATS") with a mandate of norm setting, community health, information, etc.

Thanks for sharing! As a former product owner, I love to know a bit about what's happening behind the scenes 😇 I think the Forum is immensely important, and I'm surprised to learn that there's less than 1 FTE in software engineering maintaining it.

Thanks a lot for this article, it's very useful to improve my understanding of what's happening and what to make of it! This has been discussed a lot already, but the claims were usually made with somewhat motivated reasoning and cherry-picked and/or weak arguments.

Thanks for writing this! I'm trying to think through this as I'm writing it. Here are a bunch of not-too-well-formed ideas:

• There might be "a lot more funding" available soon (note: this is still TBC. I believe a lot of caution is warranted on that question)
• This might result in a significant "lowering of the funding bar" from funders.
• In this case, it will attract many more people to:
  • work for EA and/or AI safety projects
  • launch new initiatives.
• As a community-builder, I tend to have a bias for people with deep engagement with EA principles. But I think many projects can be good with leaders who have not initially spent much time thinking about EA.
• I'm not sure I've heard much criticism in mainstream discourse about how easily EA funding was granted during the pre-FTX funding. It's not surprising, given the fact that most people don't think much about it.
• It would probably be much more discussed in some specific spheres: philanthropy in general, TPOT, non-EA spheres.
• Most of all, I think funders (and all of us) should consider the impact this situational change could bring to EA's culture, epistemics, and appropriate trust levels in what might become (again) less of a community and more of a "network".
• At this stage, I think I broadly
  • would avoid talking about "vultures" as this seems insulting to both 1) vultures and 2) people who are rationally looking for funding opportunities
  • share your state of alarm about what this will do to EA's culture
  • still believe this could be immensely good
  • believe that the increase in funding will take some time and that we should invest a lot in grantmaking to maintain decent standards of scrutiny (as well as coordination mechanisms).

I see many good points in the comments of the original The Vultures Are Circling by CitizenTen that you refer to. Most of mine were somehow expressed there already^^

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

On "Is it generally recommended for someone with my skill set to pursue "Earning to Give" (maximizing my income in the corporate marketing world and donating) rather than trying to do direct work for EA orgs?": it's been said a lot, in the past years, that we need more talented, "high-context" communicators. I encourage you to explore direct work opportunities and think deeply about what could, or couldn't, work in the context of EA.