I think that 80,000 Hours helps to demonstrate that with reasonable evidence and thought, it’s possible to inform smart people (including engineers) to do more valuable things.
A big issue is that there’s just a dearth of decent information out there. I think that if this can be remedied, things will continue to improve. This includes the fact that many of these flimsy theories are much worse than I think a lot of people assume. If people can help point that out, I’d expect there would be less public reliance on them.
80,000 Hours does seem like a relevant reference class here, and they’ve certainly had an important impact in pushing me away from my original career plans into something I think is more high-impact.
Another example might be Project Drawdown, which publishes “a how-to guide for employees pushing for sweeping climate action and includes EIGHT KEY LEVERAGE POINTS to help the world reach drawdown.”
A third is the SENS foundation, which argues for an anti-aging strategy.
80k thinks about causes on the highest level, as opposed to Project Drawdown (climate change focused) or SENS (aging/health focused).
So there seems to be support for your vision. Many other people seem to believe that it’s high-leverage to concentrate on helping engineers choose impactful projects.
One difference between your vision and all of these approaches is that you’re focused primarily on a negative approach, knocking down flimsy pet theories. By contrast, 80k, Project Drawdown, SENS, and most other examples of this sort of project focus on a positive approach, highlighting the projects and cause areas they think are most important.
There are certainly some examples of a negative approach within, say, 80k or Givewell. Usually, it’s a motivating example (i.e. PlayPumps), or a targeted argument (i.e. 80k’s articles against the impact of becoming a doctor). These can be valuable, of course! It’s just not the majority of the public-facing material in these examples. Though I expect that all these organizations have a big pile of investigations they’ve done of charities, causes, and interventions that they’ve looked into and ultimately concluded are not worth highlighting.
So if we’re using 80k as a reference class, it may be ultimately necessary to also create and focus on a positive agenda for the information you’re presenting. What sorts of engineering projects are important, tractable, and neglected?
One difference between your vision and all of these approaches is that you’re focused primarily on a negative approach, knocking down flimsy pet theories. By contrast, 80k, Project Drawdown, SENS, and most other examples of this sort of project focus on a positive approach, highlighting the projects and cause areas they think are most important.
Agreed. I see the pattern here “flimsy ideas, enormous initiatives” as clear examples of large-scale failures. The solutions that these problems hint at are another important conversation.
So if we’re using 80k as a reference class, it may be ultimately necessary to also create and focus on a positive agenda for the information you’re presenting. What sorts of engineering projects are important, tractable, and neglected?
Also agreed. I think a lot of EA analysis now would ideally be used to help inspire future altruistic programs. (Charity Entrepreneurship as perhaps the most obvious example). I think that we’ll be seeing more work like this over the next few years.
I think that 80,000 Hours helps to demonstrate that with reasonable evidence and thought, it’s possible to inform smart people (including engineers) to do more valuable things.
A big issue is that there’s just a dearth of decent information out there. I think that if this can be remedied, things will continue to improve. This includes the fact that many of these flimsy theories are much worse than I think a lot of people assume. If people can help point that out, I’d expect there would be less public reliance on them.
80,000 Hours does seem like a relevant reference class here, and they’ve certainly had an important impact in pushing me away from my original career plans into something I think is more high-impact.
Another example might be Project Drawdown, which publishes “a how-to guide for employees pushing for sweeping climate action and includes EIGHT KEY LEVERAGE POINTS to help the world reach drawdown.”
A third is the SENS foundation, which argues for an anti-aging strategy.
80k thinks about causes on the highest level, as opposed to Project Drawdown (climate change focused) or SENS (aging/health focused).
So there seems to be support for your vision. Many other people seem to believe that it’s high-leverage to concentrate on helping engineers choose impactful projects.
One difference between your vision and all of these approaches is that you’re focused primarily on a negative approach, knocking down flimsy pet theories. By contrast, 80k, Project Drawdown, SENS, and most other examples of this sort of project focus on a positive approach, highlighting the projects and cause areas they think are most important.
There are certainly some examples of a negative approach within, say, 80k or Givewell. Usually, it’s a motivating example (i.e. PlayPumps), or a targeted argument (i.e. 80k’s articles against the impact of becoming a doctor). These can be valuable, of course! It’s just not the majority of the public-facing material in these examples. Though I expect that all these organizations have a big pile of investigations they’ve done of charities, causes, and interventions that they’ve looked into and ultimately concluded are not worth highlighting.
So if we’re using 80k as a reference class, it may be ultimately necessary to also create and focus on a positive agenda for the information you’re presenting. What sorts of engineering projects are important, tractable, and neglected?
Agreed. I see the pattern here “flimsy ideas, enormous initiatives” as clear examples of large-scale failures. The solutions that these problems hint at are another important conversation.
Also agreed. I think a lot of EA analysis now would ideally be used to help inspire future altruistic programs. (Charity Entrepreneurship as perhaps the most obvious example). I think that we’ll be seeing more work like this over the next few years.