But it’s not clear if it’s a good use of their money, by their lights, to create a market for products they don’t really want and other people may not want
I’m thinking more about separating existing markets, or perhaps setting up new orgs to catch the overflow from when existing ones expand. Fwiw FTX Foundation explicitly wanted to do this—they had a category for ‘competition to existing EA orgs’. This could have been because as a different org they were sceptical of OP’s priorities, though this seems unlikely given the substantial overlap between the people involved, so it seems more like a genuine desire for a better marketplace.
If your friends have the same preferences to you, they’ll buy the same stuff, so there’s no point. If they buy stuff you’d hate, then you’ll think you shouldn’t have given them money. Either way, unless you keep giving them money, it’s only an artificial spike in consumption.
This seems too simplistic and worrying if we genuinely think this is how OP think. Most people recognise that there’s a wisdom in crowds, and epistemic advantage to a diversity of thoughtful viewpoints.
I’m thinking more about separating existing markets, or perhaps setting up new orgs to catch the overflow from when existing ones expand. Fwiw FTX Foundation explicitly wanted to do this—they had a category for ‘competition to existing EA orgs’. This could have been because as a different org they were sceptical of OP’s priorities, though this seems unlikely given the substantial overlap between the people involved, so it seems more like a genuine desire for a better marketplace.
This seems too simplistic and worrying if we genuinely think this is how OP think. Most people recognise that there’s a wisdom in crowds, and epistemic advantage to a diversity of thoughtful viewpoints.