I’m excited for this decentralized funding community, and I’m very grateful for the $248 I’ve personally collected through the service to date. However, I feel like individual funders need to further elaborate on what they’re funding needs are, what they would do with marginal funds, and a brief sketch of how they expect to have an impact.
I just updated my profile to give an example of what I would mean (in my case, it’s an example of how funding me does not lead to impact).
Diego’s profile is the closest to what I’m looking for, though I’d want to know more about what he plans for each of his projects and why his living expenses are >$50K a year. (This is not meant to call out Diego in particular, so sorry if that’s the case!)
I definitely would also encourage donors to add more to their profiles! Many are still quite minimal and could be improved.
On the other hand, I think that there’s not too much incentive right now with so few people donating. This is a good reason for others to donate more, specifically to ones with nice profiles (if they want to specifically encourage such a thing).
Not asking you Peter, just people reading this in general.
My living costs are much closer to 25k a year than to 50k actually. Additional donations, far from my current funding, would go into other things that can be found described in my Patreon account. I believe my Patreon account maps better into what you think people should be doing on Gratipay. I posted recently about shifting to Patreon while costs are low on the EA facebook group, and some people agreed that was a good idea.
Regardless, there is a much more important issue from my point of view: donating to individuals is much cheaper than to institutions, or universities, because individuals don’t have many of the fixed costs and bureocratic costs those institutions bear. Even if it were the case that a donee wanted to receive 50k for their living expenses, this is still less than the overal cost of employing an individual in most of the EA organizations to which most people make donations. Young EAs cost their institutions (and thus their donors) up to 90k per year, which is enough money to sustain three EAs even if they live in the most expensive areas of the planet. The math is simple and clear. People however are wary of donating to individuals at the moment. I suspect over time this will be much more common among EAs, since many of the donees already have, or will build, a track record of doing good work and and being accountable and reliable in a timely manner. I’m trying to spearhead this shift in part because I’m one of those who currently can, since I still have some funding for the next months, and I’ve been sponsoring myself as an EA for years. Most people can’t afford to participate in this Beta test, which is why I invite everyone who wants to work as an EA and can still sustain themselves for a few months to join Patreon or Gratipay and help incrase the flow of EA to EA direct money on the receiving end, not just the donation end.
Regardless, there is a much more important issue from my point of view: donating to individuals is much cheaper than to institutions, or universities, because individuals don’t have many of the fixed costs and bureaucratic costs those institutions bear.
First, I’m fully in support of this kind of model, and I hope that maybe someday I am funded by it. But I don’t think your core thesis is correct, because:
1.) Some organizations don’t have high costs. The only organization I have knowledge of, Charity Science, does not have such costs.
2.) When you’re funding an organization on the margin, you aren’t funding the fixed or bureaucratic costs.
3.) These costs carry with them corresponding advantages of coordination and shared access to resources.
4.) Donating to an organization can be done tax deductibly, which, in the US, is often a savings of 25%.
-
Young EAs cost their institutions (and thus their donors) up to 90k per year
I’m excited for this decentralized funding community, and I’m very grateful for the $248 I’ve personally collected through the service to date. However, I feel like individual funders need to further elaborate on what they’re funding needs are, what they would do with marginal funds, and a brief sketch of how they expect to have an impact.
I just updated my profile to give an example of what I would mean (in my case, it’s an example of how funding me does not lead to impact).
Diego’s profile is the closest to what I’m looking for, though I’d want to know more about what he plans for each of his projects and why his living expenses are >$50K a year. (This is not meant to call out Diego in particular, so sorry if that’s the case!)
I definitely would also encourage donors to add more to their profiles! Many are still quite minimal and could be improved.
On the other hand, I think that there’s not too much incentive right now with so few people donating. This is a good reason for others to donate more, specifically to ones with nice profiles (if they want to specifically encourage such a thing).
Not asking you Peter, just people reading this in general.
I’ll soon edit my profile with my EA plan.
My living costs are much closer to 25k a year than to 50k actually. Additional donations, far from my current funding, would go into other things that can be found described in my Patreon account. I believe my Patreon account maps better into what you think people should be doing on Gratipay. I posted recently about shifting to Patreon while costs are low on the EA facebook group, and some people agreed that was a good idea.
Regardless, there is a much more important issue from my point of view: donating to individuals is much cheaper than to institutions, or universities, because individuals don’t have many of the fixed costs and bureocratic costs those institutions bear. Even if it were the case that a donee wanted to receive 50k for their living expenses, this is still less than the overal cost of employing an individual in most of the EA organizations to which most people make donations. Young EAs cost their institutions (and thus their donors) up to 90k per year, which is enough money to sustain three EAs even if they live in the most expensive areas of the planet. The math is simple and clear. People however are wary of donating to individuals at the moment. I suspect over time this will be much more common among EAs, since many of the donees already have, or will build, a track record of doing good work and and being accountable and reliable in a timely manner. I’m trying to spearhead this shift in part because I’m one of those who currently can, since I still have some funding for the next months, and I’ve been sponsoring myself as an EA for years. Most people can’t afford to participate in this Beta test, which is why I invite everyone who wants to work as an EA and can still sustain themselves for a few months to join Patreon or Gratipay and help incrase the flow of EA to EA direct money on the receiving end, not just the donation end.
First, I’m fully in support of this kind of model, and I hope that maybe someday I am funded by it. But I don’t think your core thesis is correct, because:
1.) Some organizations don’t have high costs. The only organization I have knowledge of, Charity Science, does not have such costs.
2.) When you’re funding an organization on the margin, you aren’t funding the fixed or bureaucratic costs.
3.) These costs carry with them corresponding advantages of coordination and shared access to resources.
4.) Donating to an organization can be done tax deductibly, which, in the US, is often a savings of 25%.
-
Can you explain how you arrived at this figure?