Thanks for this. As someone who has been quietly and frugally doing unpaid EA work for half a decade, it is incredibly frustrating to see these "top EAs" focusing so much on elevating themselves and their personal connections. I keep picking up on bad 'vibes' in the EA community that can never be expressed because they're verbal and not numerical, but at least I can confirm that I'm not crazy when an SBF or a Kat proves me right.
I am not an effective altruist, and effective altruists should feel free to discount what I say accordingly. I also have strong opinions about the process here (https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/bwtpBFQXKaGxuic6Q/effective-aspersions-how-the-nonlinear-investigation-went), and effective altruists should feel free to discount what I say based on that as well. Finally, I have never been persuaded that any AI safety stuff is doing much, so effective altruists should feel free to discount what I have to say about AI safety orgs due to that as well.
To be succinct and to the point: Inasmuch as EA follows your preferences, I suspect it will either fail as a subculture or deserve to fail. You present a vision of a subculture with little room for grace or goodwill, a space where everyone is constantly evaluating each other and trying to decide: are you worthy to stand in our presence? Do you belong in our hallowed, select group? Which skeletons are in your closet? Where are your character flaws? What should we know, what should we see, that allows us to exclude you?
You are welcome to do that. Perhaps you will even succeed in it. But you cannot at once decry the notion of "top EAs" and the harm it causes, then promote a values system based on effectiveness as an EA that actively excludes everyone other than the same "top EAs" you decry a few paragraphs above. You advocate for an insular and elitist group that stands apart from society, creates an internal network (invitations to Effective Altruism Global, listing on the 80,000 Hours job board, membership in effective altruist coworking spaces, being interviewed on effective altruist podcasts, and so on) open only to the Worthy, and seeks to have dramatic impacts on the world writ large.
Explode your organizations if you will; celebrate the process of burning them down with mixes of truth, rumor, and uncharitable slants if you like; but you are fooling yourself if you think such a winnowing process will lead to a high-minded strong group of idealists and not a petty, risk-averse, cautious group who knows that the knives will be out at signs of weakness and who constantly seeks to self-purify and root out the unworthy within it. There is much I like within effective altruism; your vision, self-contradictory and self-destructive as it is, seems effective primarily at damaging that. I am not persuaded.
Something about Kat Wood's Facebook post(s) always rubbed me the wrong way...
I think you captured it -- it's the implication that this is part of virtuous and altruistic work. It's clearly not. It's fine for people to enjoy traveling, vacations, and other luxuries.. but implying this sort of lifestyle is part and parcel of the Effective Altruism movement is messed up on a number of levels.
... I can imagine an counter argument that the lure of that sort of lifestyle could get more people to work in EA, resulting in a net benefit? But more people doing it increases the surface area for it to leak out to EA's critics...harming EA's reptuation.. So I don't find that argument compelling. People care a lot about people's intentions, especially when those people are claiming to be more virtuous and ethical.
Thanks for the post. As someone considering if and how to start contributing to EA, the last post made me concerned. I tried writing out a comment that was basically going to ask you if points 1 and 2 are normal for EA organizations, because of so, I'm not interested. You addressed my concerns perfectly
Once again, I appreciate your clearly expressed insights into the nature of Nonlinear. Words and actions do matter, and the treatment of employees/fellow workers ought to be scrutinised. The values attributable to anyone attaching themselves to Effective Altruism must meet with the standards implied by the very words 'effective' and 'altruism'. Thank you for the intelligence and compassion you bring to bear through your examination of Nonlinear's words and deeds, along with their consequences.
There’s something to be said for marginal EA, e.g. that you might as well do something good while yachting, if you’re going to yacht regardless. But I worry we’ve become too blasé about giving EA kudos to people doing more than they have to, but far less than they could. Those people deserve some credit! But kudos are a resource we can allocate in order to result in more good being done, just like money. We should try to spend them optimally.
Also, “marginal EA” is arguably just regular charity.
Thanks for this. As someone who has been quietly and frugally doing unpaid EA work for half a decade, it is incredibly frustrating to see these "top EAs" focusing so much on elevating themselves and their personal connections. I keep picking up on bad 'vibes' in the EA community that can never be expressed because they're verbal and not numerical, but at least I can confirm that I'm not crazy when an SBF or a Kat proves me right.
I am not an effective altruist, and effective altruists should feel free to discount what I say accordingly. I also have strong opinions about the process here (https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/bwtpBFQXKaGxuic6Q/effective-aspersions-how-the-nonlinear-investigation-went), and effective altruists should feel free to discount what I say based on that as well. Finally, I have never been persuaded that any AI safety stuff is doing much, so effective altruists should feel free to discount what I have to say about AI safety orgs due to that as well.
To be succinct and to the point: Inasmuch as EA follows your preferences, I suspect it will either fail as a subculture or deserve to fail. You present a vision of a subculture with little room for grace or goodwill, a space where everyone is constantly evaluating each other and trying to decide: are you worthy to stand in our presence? Do you belong in our hallowed, select group? Which skeletons are in your closet? Where are your character flaws? What should we know, what should we see, that allows us to exclude you?
You are welcome to do that. Perhaps you will even succeed in it. But you cannot at once decry the notion of "top EAs" and the harm it causes, then promote a values system based on effectiveness as an EA that actively excludes everyone other than the same "top EAs" you decry a few paragraphs above. You advocate for an insular and elitist group that stands apart from society, creates an internal network (invitations to Effective Altruism Global, listing on the 80,000 Hours job board, membership in effective altruist coworking spaces, being interviewed on effective altruist podcasts, and so on) open only to the Worthy, and seeks to have dramatic impacts on the world writ large.
Explode your organizations if you will; celebrate the process of burning them down with mixes of truth, rumor, and uncharitable slants if you like; but you are fooling yourself if you think such a winnowing process will lead to a high-minded strong group of idealists and not a petty, risk-averse, cautious group who knows that the knives will be out at signs of weakness and who constantly seeks to self-purify and root out the unworthy within it. There is much I like within effective altruism; your vision, self-contradictory and self-destructive as it is, seems effective primarily at damaging that. I am not persuaded.
Well said! I think I basically agree on all counts.
Something about Kat Wood's Facebook post(s) always rubbed me the wrong way...
I think you captured it -- it's the implication that this is part of virtuous and altruistic work. It's clearly not. It's fine for people to enjoy traveling, vacations, and other luxuries.. but implying this sort of lifestyle is part and parcel of the Effective Altruism movement is messed up on a number of levels.
... I can imagine an counter argument that the lure of that sort of lifestyle could get more people to work in EA, resulting in a net benefit? But more people doing it increases the surface area for it to leak out to EA's critics...harming EA's reptuation.. So I don't find that argument compelling. People care a lot about people's intentions, especially when those people are claiming to be more virtuous and ethical.
Thanks for the post. As someone considering if and how to start contributing to EA, the last post made me concerned. I tried writing out a comment that was basically going to ask you if points 1 and 2 are normal for EA organizations, because of so, I'm not interested. You addressed my concerns perfectly
Once again, I appreciate your clearly expressed insights into the nature of Nonlinear. Words and actions do matter, and the treatment of employees/fellow workers ought to be scrutinised. The values attributable to anyone attaching themselves to Effective Altruism must meet with the standards implied by the very words 'effective' and 'altruism'. Thank you for the intelligence and compassion you bring to bear through your examination of Nonlinear's words and deeds, along with their consequences.
Strongly agree with this.
I hope every EA would “mmm” and snap to this.
There’s something to be said for marginal EA, e.g. that you might as well do something good while yachting, if you’re going to yacht regardless. But I worry we’ve become too blasé about giving EA kudos to people doing more than they have to, but far less than they could. Those people deserve some credit! But kudos are a resource we can allocate in order to result in more good being done, just like money. We should try to spend them optimally.
Also, “marginal EA” is arguably just regular charity.