I lead a small think tank dedicated to accelerating the pace of scientific advancement by improving the conditions of science funding. As well, I'm a senior advisor to the Social Science Research Council. Prior to these roles, I spent some 9 years at Arnold Ventures (formerly the Laura and John Arnold Foundation) as VP of Research.
Science policy, reproducibility, and philanthropy.
I don’t think Moravec’s paradox is a real paradox in the first place. The reason we think of activities like walking, using your hands, being able to speak language, etc. as easy is because we don’t have any long-term memories from the first few years of life when we had to figure all of that out from scratch. https://x.com/stuartbuck1/status/1798547161489231928
"One-on-one (1:1) meetings are widely recognized as one of the most valuable aspects of EA Global (EAG) and EAGx conferences"
Speaking just for myself, the shift to endless one-on-one meetings is the single biggest reason I have no desire ever to attend another EA conference. [I've been to the following: EA Global 2015 at Google (no Swapcard or one-on-ones there), EA Global in DC 2022, and EA Global Feb. 2024]
There are pros and cons.
Pros:
Cons: You list lots of ways one-on-ones can go wrong, but there are many more.
For me, the net value is overwhelmingly negative.
Not sure if this is responsive, but while most people (barring disability) do reach a decent level of proficiency at navigating the world, I think the variance can still be huge. Look at the feats of Olympic gymnasts or professional basketball players--hardly anyone could reach that level no matter how much they trained.