This makes sense. Definitely a strong argument for a closed or limited-access database, or no database at all.
It would be an attention sink to spend time tediously rebutting this stuff—effective altruists’ time is valuable
I think this is definitely true for most people but not all. I’ve met lots of people affiliated with EA who have mundane software engineering jobs and are interesting in mainly contributing casually every now and then.
a classic failure mode of online movements is to become “too online” until you are a bunch of internet atheists compiling databases of arguments and fallacies with which to do battle against an equally dedicated army of internet creationists
Strong agree on this one, although I think the justifications are only the tip of the iceberg. The risks are much greater IMO, especially related to social media, but it involves information I’m not willing to talk about here on a public forum.
These smart, careful people are exactly the kind of people who are least likely be swayed by obviously dumb, bad-faith hit-pieces that deploy the language of wokeism to make nonsensical attacks in random directions.
I somewhat disagree on this one. I used to be a strong advocate for actively preventing large numbers of woke nonsensical people from dominating EA and trying to turn it into one of Bernie Sanders’s cause areas. But now I think that mostly, people start out obsessed with the language of nonsensical wokeism and gradually choose to become smart, careful people after meeting large numbers of other people who are already careful and smart. Everyone has to start somewhere, and some people have better starting points than others.
trying to dispatch internet footsoldiers to crusade against our enemies would likely be a huge turn-off
I think this is pretty easy to prevent. Just put a disclaimer at the top of the database telling people not to do that. You don’t even need to make it limited-access, although that would help.
The only reason that journalists are using misinformation to target EA is because they know there’s absolutely nothing stopping them, like a bully targeting the smallest kids on a playground. It’s basically open season. Increasing awareness (or even accountability) makes sense here.
This makes sense. Definitely a strong argument for a closed or limited-access database, or no database at all.
I think this is definitely true for most people but not all. I’ve met lots of people affiliated with EA who have mundane software engineering jobs and are interesting in mainly contributing casually every now and then.
Strong agree on this one, although I think the justifications are only the tip of the iceberg. The risks are much greater IMO, especially related to social media, but it involves information I’m not willing to talk about here on a public forum.
I somewhat disagree on this one. I used to be a strong advocate for actively preventing large numbers of woke nonsensical people from dominating EA and trying to turn it into one of Bernie Sanders’s cause areas. But now I think that mostly, people start out obsessed with the language of nonsensical wokeism and gradually choose to become smart, careful people after meeting large numbers of other people who are already careful and smart. Everyone has to start somewhere, and some people have better starting points than others.
I think this is pretty easy to prevent. Just put a disclaimer at the top of the database telling people not to do that. You don’t even need to make it limited-access, although that would help.
The only reason that journalists are using misinformation to target EA is because they know there’s absolutely nothing stopping them, like a bully targeting the smallest kids on a playground. It’s basically open season. Increasing awareness (or even accountability) makes sense here.