If you win you can always decide to ask GWWC to defer to the benefactor for the allocation (if they would be interested in doing so), or to the people or funds that you think would best allocate the winnings.
The benefactor chose to participate in the lottery, if they thought it would be worse for the world they wouldnât have, so allocating resources to something other than the lottery because you think their allocation is better than yours is counterintuitive to me.
In expectation, you are not âtaking moneyâ from the benefactor by playing, since the expected value is the same as donating directly. In expected value, the benefactor gets the same money that they put in. To say it in a different way: the amount of money that was allocated by participants instead of the benefactor is the same as the amount of money that was allocated by the benefactor instead of the participants, so who is a better allocator seems independent from whether the lottery is a good idea.
(I donât know who the benefactor is, I assume itâs a large fund or an individual large donor for whom $2.6M is not a large amount of money)
I disagree:
If you win you can always decide to ask GWWC to defer to the benefactor for the allocation (if they would be interested in doing so), or to the people or funds that you think would best allocate the winnings.
The benefactor chose to participate in the lottery, if they thought it would be worse for the world they wouldnât have, so allocating resources to something other than the lottery because you think their allocation is better than yours is counterintuitive to me.
In expectation, you are not âtaking moneyâ from the benefactor by playing, since the expected value is the same as donating directly. In expected value, the benefactor gets the same money that they put in.
To say it in a different way: the amount of money that was allocated by participants instead of the benefactor is the same as the amount of money that was allocated by the benefactor instead of the participants, so who is a better allocator seems independent from whether the lottery is a good idea.
(I donât know who the benefactor is, I assume itâs a large fund or an individual large donor for whom $2.6M is not a large amount of money)