For clarity being 2x better than cash transfers would still provide it with good reason to be on GWWC's top charity list, right? Since GiveDirectly is?
I think GiveDirectly gets special privilege because "just give the money to the poorest people" is such a safe bet for how to spend money altruistically.
Like if a billionaire wanted to spend a million dollars making your life better, they could either:
just give you the million dollars directly, or
spend the money on something that they personally think would be best for you
You'd want them to set a pretty high bar of "I have high confidence that the thing I chose to spend the money on will be much better than whatever you would spend the money on yourself."
If you interpret "the Effective Altruism Forum" as a metonym for "the people who use the forum", then it is true (like how you can say "Twitter is going nuts over this").
It's weird, but I don't see any reason to make a fuss about it.
I think the hard part would be coming up with ideas and writing copy for the calendar. Illustrations are time consuming but straightforward (and fun), and there are probably plug-and-play services for manufacture and distribution.
One project I'm working on is compressing EA-related material into tweet form (eg), and a curated selection of these could form the backbone of the copy.
I've made a note in my calendar on September 1 next year to revisit this idea and see if I've got enough raw material for put something together for 2024.
If someone else wants to participate (writing, ideas, illustrations, or even accountability check-ins), DM me or leave a comment and this'll be much more likely to happen.
I think GiveDirectly gets special privilege because "just give the money to the poorest people" is such a safe bet for how to spend money altruistically.
Like if a billionaire wanted to spend a million dollars making your life better, they could either:
You'd want them to set a pretty high bar of "I have high confidence that the thing I chose to spend the money on will be much better than whatever you would spend the money on yourself."
You're welcome!
I've added the communities page to the main text.
ty Lara!
Cool, yep. This checks out.
Thanks!
PS, I'm asking because I'm working on a "history of EA" video. The idea is that this is a nice narrative-driven way to explain the EA memeplex.
I gather that you think it's an issue worth correcting? Feel free to suggest a more correct phrasing for semafor and I'll pass it on.
If you interpret "the Effective Altruism Forum" as a metonym for "the people who use the forum", then it is true (like how you can say "Twitter is going nuts over this").
It's weird, but I don't see any reason to make a fuss about it.
Semafor has corrected the article.
Ah, thanks. You are right.
I have tweeted them a correction.
I'm not not interested in this idea.
I think the hard part would be coming up with ideas and writing copy for the calendar. Illustrations are time consuming but straightforward (and fun), and there are probably plug-and-play services for manufacture and distribution.
One project I'm working on is compressing EA-related material into tweet form (eg), and a curated selection of these could form the backbone of the copy.
I've made a note in my calendar on September 1 next year to revisit this idea and see if I've got enough raw material for put something together for 2024.
If someone else wants to participate (writing, ideas, illustrations, or even accountability check-ins), DM me or leave a comment and this'll be much more likely to happen.