As it stands I struggle to justify GHD work at all on cluelessness grounds. GiveWell-type analyses ignore a lot of foreseeable indirect effects of the interventions e.g. those on non-human animals. It isn’t clear to me that GHD work is net positive.
Would you mind expanding a bit on why this applies to GHD and not other cause areas please? E.g.: wouldn’t your concerns about animal welfare from GHD work also apply to x-risk work?
Would you mind expanding a bit on why this applies to GHD and not other cause areas please? E.g.: wouldn’t your concerns about animal welfare from GHD work also apply to x-risk work?
I’ll direct you to my response to Arepo