Karthik Tadepalli comments on GiveWell may have made 1 billion dollars of harmful grants, and Ambitious Impact incubated 8 harmful organisations via increasing factory-farming?

[Karthik Tadepalli]

My statement was a bit churlish by glossing over the differences in arguments you make at different points. However, I think it’s fair because they all have the same crux (moral weights).

I wonder whether you are also against repeating that the best interventions in global health and development help humans way more cost-effectively than random organisations.

Definitely. I think that could arguably be a valuable message for outreach to ordinary people, but a post on the forum that looked like that would not be a useful or substantive contribution.

[Vasco Grilo🔸]

I think that could arguably be a valuable message for outreach to ordinary people, but a post on the forum that looked like that would not be a useful or substantive contribution.

If someone pointed out on the forum that cash transfers in high income countries are among the most cost-effective interventions without making any reference to GiveDirectly’s cash transfer in low income countries, I think it would be good for someone to comment that money goes further in lower income countries. The person may not be aware of this. I do not think it would make sense for such comment to be downvoted just because most readers are already aware of it.