Additionally, I wonder why there hasnāt been an effort to start a more āintenseā EA hub somewhere outside the Bay to save on rent and office costs. Seems like weāre been writing about coordination problems for quite some time; letās go and solve one.
There is an āEA Hotelā, which is decently-sized, very intensely EA, and very cheap.
Occasionally it makes sense for people to accept very low cost-of-living situations. But a personās impact is usually a lot higher than their salary. Suppose that a personās salary is x, their impact 10x, and their impact is 1.1 times higher when they live in SF, due to proximity to funders and AI companies. Then you would have to cut costs by 90% to make it worthwhile to live elsewhere. Otherwise, you would essentially be stepping over dollars to pick up dimes.
One advantage of the EA hotel, compared to a grant, for example, is that selection effects for it are surprisingly strong. This can help resolve some of the challenges of evaluation.
Unfortunately, they havenāt gotten anywhere. If you think you can solve the problem, then go for it! But keep in mind that people have tried this in the past and failed.
Seems like the kind of thing that should have at least one FTE on it. Is there a reason no one has really put a lot of time into it (e.g. a specific compelling argument that this isnāt the right call), or is it just that no one has gotten to it?
Some folks in EA are pretty nervous about projects where a bunch of folks live together. Part of this is due to what happened in Leverage. Part of this is that when people live together, there is often drama and there are potential PR risks.
And what Iām describing isnāt an individual project full of people who live together; itās coordinating a bunch of people who work on many different projects to move to the same general area. And even if I were describing an individual project full of people who live together, every single failure of such a project within EA is a rounding error compared to the Manhattan Project, for better or worse.
Additionally, I wonder why there hasnāt been an effort to start a more āintenseā EA hub somewhere outside the Bay to save on rent and office costs. Seems like weāre been writing about coordination problems for quite some time; letās go and solve one.
There is an āEA Hotelā, which is decently-sized, very intensely EA, and very cheap.
Occasionally it makes sense for people to accept very low cost-of-living situations. But a personās impact is usually a lot higher than their salary. Suppose that a personās salary is x, their impact 10x, and their impact is 1.1 times higher when they live in SF, due to proximity to funders and AI companies. Then you would have to cut costs by 90% to make it worthwhile to live elsewhere. Otherwise, you would essentially be stepping over dollars to pick up dimes.
One advantage of the EA hotel, compared to a grant, for example, is that selection effects for it are surprisingly strong. This can help resolve some of the challenges of evaluation.
There have been attempts:
ā¢ Coordination of Rationality/āEA/āSSC Housing Projects
ā¢ New EA Hub Search and Planning
Unfortunately, they havenāt gotten anywhere. If you think you can solve the problem, then go for it! But keep in mind that people have tried this in the past and failed.
How many FTEs are working on this problem?
Like none.
Seems like the kind of thing that should have at least one FTE on it. Is there a reason no one has really put a lot of time into it (e.g. a specific compelling argument that this isnāt the right call), or is it just that no one has gotten to it?
Funding would be hard to come by.
Some folks in EA are pretty nervous about projects where a bunch of folks live together. Part of this is due to what happened in Leverage. Part of this is that when people live together, there is often drama and there are potential PR risks.
And one more thing: if some people are nervous, wouldnāt it be possible to get funded from people who are enthusiastic?
Well, if you think you can pull it off, feel free to go for it and see if you can find interested funders.
And what Iām describing isnāt an individual project full of people who live together; itās coordinating a bunch of people who work on many different projects to move to the same general area. And even if I were describing an individual project full of people who live together, every single failure of such a project within EA is a rounding error compared to the Manhattan Project, for better or worse.
I thought the whole point of EA was that we based our grantmaking decisions on rigorous analyses rather than hunches and anecdotes.