“For instance, some charities help 100 or even 1,000 times as many people as others, when given the same amount of resources”Someone told me that an EA org is about to publish an article saying this isn’t true.
See also Why Charities Usually Don’t Differ Astronomically in Expected Cost-Effectiveness, mentioned in Criticisms of the use of cost-effectiveness estimates, at the end of Chapter 2
Current theme: default
Less Wrong (text)
Less Wrong (link)
Arrow keys: Next/previous image
Escape or click: Hide zoomed image
Space bar: Reset image size & position
Scroll to zoom in/out
(When zoomed in, drag to pan; double-click to close)
Keys shown in yellow (e.g., ]) are accesskeys, and require a browser-specific modifier key (or keys).
]
Keys shown in grey (e.g., ?) do not require any modifier keys.
?
Esc
h
f
a
m
v
c
r
q
t
u
o
,
.
/
s
n
e
;
Enter
[
\
k
i
l
=
-
0
′
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
→
↓
←
↑
Space
x
z
`
g
“For instance, some charities help 100 or even 1,000 times as many people as others, when given the same amount of resources”
Someone told me that an EA org is about to publish an article saying this isn’t true.
See also Why Charities Usually Don’t Differ Astronomically in Expected Cost-Effectiveness, mentioned in Criticisms of the use of cost-effectiveness estimates, at the end of Chapter 2