I would also like to see OpenPhil look back at a bunch of their “hits based” grants. They’ve done a decent amount of them and I think we should be able to get some idea about whether the approach is working as planned. It wouldn’t have to be too detailed. They could even do something a bit loose, like categorising them into maybe 4 buckets like …..
1. Miss 2. Probable miss 3. Some benefit 4. Home Run hit successful!
Yep I agree!
I’ve done a quicky sanity check on the New Incentives numbers and it doesn’t seem quite plausible, but my it was fast and I could be plain wrong.
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/FxAtFMRnJZ2dbLBhA/sanity-check-givewell-s-new-incentives-estimate-seems
I would also like to see OpenPhil look back at a bunch of their “hits based” grants. They’ve done a decent amount of them and I think we should be able to get some idea about whether the approach is working as planned. It wouldn’t have to be too detailed. They could even do something a bit loose, like categorising them into maybe 4 buckets like …..
1. Miss 2. Probable miss 3. Some benefit 4. Home Run hit successful!
Or similar