In a throwback to articles like this one, including one critique that tessa summarized as:
Open Phil is offering large grants to a few carefully-selected parties, giving them outsize impact (and a diversity of perspectives and research focuses is good the the field)
I’m also interested in whether Open Phil funded parties did better or worse than either a) existing big players (as opposed to a possibly different bar of being measured “against reality”) or b) a more diverse/”democratic”marketplace of ideas among credentialed biosecurity folks.
In a throwback to articles like this one, including one critique that tessa summarized as:
I’m also interested in whether Open Phil funded parties did better or worse than either a) existing big players (as opposed to a possibly different bar of being measured “against reality”) or b) a more diverse/”democratic”marketplace of ideas among credentialed biosecurity folks.