I’d prefer global health and AI folks updated to care more about animals, rather than farmed animal advocates updated more to care about indirect effects.
I think the latter group will/should find your arguments much more convincing, though, yeah… I doubt the potential intractability of WAW is a crux for GDH people—otherwise, they’d be working on farmed animals?[1] And same for many AI safetists, I think. If they work on AI safety for neartermist reasons, then what I say about the crux of GDH people applies to them too. If they’re longtermists, they can just say they happen to think that AI safety is more pressing than current WAW work for magnitude reasons (as I suggest in our other comment thread), even if they also think long-term WAW is what matters most!
But yeah, I don’t doubt that many GDH and AI safety folks gave you the tractability of WAW concern as a reason to favor their work over yours. And you’re right to argue this is a bad argument. I just don’t think this is their real crux, or would be their real crux under more reflection. It’d instead most likely be either the above magnitude longtermist argument or reasons not to morally care about non-human animals nearly as much as you do.
I get the frustration, though. Focusing on convincing farmed animal advocates, specifically, because of the above feels like infighting. (Your response made me slightly edit my phrasing in my first comment to make it less adversarial-looking towards farmed animal advocates who feel the way I describe, thanks). :)
just stepping back a bit, i don’t think the biggest issues here are about infighting within animal welfare or whether GHD and AI people care enough about animals. I think zero sum games aren’t a great framing.
for a start i think close to zero GHD people are not working on WAW because they “think it’s intractable”. Most of them are likely just really into their current work, have a better skillset/experience for GHD or just don’t think WAW is their jam to work on in general. i would be surprised if there were even 10 people working in GHD thinking “oh, if WAW was a bit more tractable i would change careers”. there might be one or 2 tho...?
i think if you keep making good arguments for WAW and then start to get a few practical real world wins attributible to your work, then more people will gradually fund you and work with you.
I think the latter group will/should find your arguments much more convincing, though, yeah… I doubt the potential intractability of WAW is a crux for GDH people—otherwise, they’d be working on farmed animals?[1] And same for many AI safetists, I think. If they work on AI safety for neartermist reasons, then what I say about the crux of GDH people applies to them too. If they’re longtermists, they can just say they happen to think that AI safety is more pressing than current WAW work for magnitude reasons (as I suggest in our other comment thread), even if they also think long-term WAW is what matters most!
But yeah, I don’t doubt that many GDH and AI safety folks gave you the tractability of WAW concern as a reason to favor their work over yours. And you’re right to argue this is a bad argument. I just don’t think this is their real crux, or would be their real crux under more reflection. It’d instead most likely be either the above magnitude longtermist argument or reasons not to morally care about non-human animals nearly as much as you do.
I get the frustration, though. Focusing on convincing farmed animal advocates, specifically, because of the above feels like infighting. (Your response made me slightly edit my phrasing in my first comment to make it less adversarial-looking towards farmed animal advocates who feel the way I describe, thanks). :)
EDIT November 22nd: Oh maybe a few people who don’t want to be associated with veganism or something!
just stepping back a bit, i don’t think the biggest issues here are about infighting within animal welfare or whether GHD and AI people care enough about animals. I think zero sum games aren’t a great framing.
for a start i think close to zero GHD people are not working on WAW because they “think it’s intractable”. Most of them are likely just really into their current work, have a better skillset/experience for GHD or just don’t think WAW is their jam to work on in general. i would be surprised if there were even 10 people working in GHD thinking “oh, if WAW was a bit more tractable i would change careers”. there might be one or 2 tho...?
i think if you keep making good arguments for WAW and then start to get a few practical real world wins attributible to your work, then more people will gradually fund you and work with you.