Ozzie Gooen
Bio
I'm currently researching forecasting and epistemics as part of the Quantified Uncertainty Research Institute.
Posts 78
Comments864
Topic contributions4
Why, if anyone, should be leaders within Effective Altruism?
I think that OP often actively doesn't want much responsibility. CEA is the more obvious fit, but they often can only do so much, and also they arguably very much represent OP's interests more than that of EA community members. (just look at where their funding is coming from, or the fact that there's no way for EA community members to vote on their board or anything).
I think that there's a clear responsibility gap and would like to see more understanding here, along with ideally plans of how things can improve.
Thanks!
> EA AWF’s comparative advantage is often in funding small and medium-scale projects and I think it makes sense to serve this role in the project development pipeline.
Yea, I'm curious how true that is. This assumes that OP does a job that's hard-to-beat for the larger projects, among all sub-causes of animal welfare. Also, it seems unhealthy to me for OP to be such an overwhelming donor to some of these groups (I assume it is for Animals, similar to other some of longtermism/EA).
Again, I don't place a huge amount of confidence here, but I think among the worlds where a big mistake is being made, this seems like a more likely case to me.
I think it's neat!
But I think there's work to do on the display of the aggregate.
- I imagine there should probably be a table somewhere at least (a list of each person and what they say).
- This might show a distribution, above.
- There must be some way to just not have the icons overlap with each other like this. Like, use a second dimension, just to list them. Maybe use a wheat plot? I think strip plots and swarm plots could also be options.
While romantic partner's defection might create some out-of-pocket costs, but I don't think the knowledge that I'd get some money out of my wife defecting would make me feel any better about the possibility
Consider this, as examples of where it might be important:
1. You are financially dependent on your spouse. If they cheated on you, you would likely want to leave them, but you wouldn't want to be trapped due to finances.
2. You're nervous about the potential expenses of a divorce.
I think that this situation is probably a poor fit for insurance at this point, just because of moral risks that would happen, but perhaps one day it might be viable to some extent.
> So I'd want to think more about the relative merits of novel private-sector insurance schemes versus strengthening the socialized schemes.
I'm all for improvements on socialized schemes too. No reason not for both strategies to be tested and used. In theory, insurance could be much easier and faster to be implemented. It can take ages for nation-wide reform to happen.
How can we best find new EA donors?
I have a lot of respect for OP, but I think it's clear that we could really use a larger funding base. My guess is that there should be a lot more thinking here.