I find it slightly concerning that many EAs come from privileged backgrounds, and the default community building strategy for acquiring new members is to target people from … privileged backgrounds.
Whenever you’re a Hammer and the solution you’ve arrived at is to look for Nails, I think an extra layer of scepticism should be applied.
Strong +1 to the extra layer of scrutiny, but at the same time, there are reasons that the privileged people are at the top in most places, having to do with the actual benefits they have and bring to the table. This is unfair and a bad thing for society, but also a fact to deal with.
If we wanted to try to address the unfairness and disparity, that seems wonderful, but simply recruiting people from less privileged groups doesn’t accomplish what is needed. Some obvious additional parts of the puzzle include needing to provide actual financial security to the less privileged people, helping them build networks outside of EA with influential people, and coaching and feedback.
Those all seem great, but I’m uncertain it’s a reasonable use of the community’s limited financial resources—and we should nonetheless acknowledge this as a serious problem.
Just to add to this (or maybe just say it in different terms)
I think that EA, when taken to certain logical conclusions, can seem ruthless and cold-hearted.
Here, it’s very difficult to optimize for both: 1. We want to make sure that we hire people such that we get the best straightforward ROI. 2. We want to make sure that the process is “fair” for applicants in some larger moralistic way.
There’s often tradeoffs here. Optimizing for (1) often comes with doing inexpensive and fast searches for talent, then paying the least that you need to. Optimizing for (2) often comes with extensive application processes and higher costs.
I think that the question is complex and nuanced, so I wouldn’t recommend going completely on the side of (1). At the same time, I could understand that a lot of people nervous about maximizing EV would generally stay close to (1).
People who don’t come from privileged backgrounds (e.g. the 700 million people living on less of $2.15/day) don’t have the resources to worry about helping others effectively, the vast majority doesn’t speak English, and so on.
Random anecdote: I’m in a hospital for a minor visit right now, and I don’t find it concerning at all that many doctors here are likely to be from privileged backgrounds
I find it slightly concerning that many EAs come from privileged backgrounds, and the default community building strategy for acquiring new members is to target people from … privileged backgrounds.
Whenever you’re a Hammer and the solution you’ve arrived at is to look for Nails, I think an extra layer of scepticism should be applied.
Strong +1 to the extra layer of scrutiny, but at the same time, there are reasons that the privileged people are at the top in most places, having to do with the actual benefits they have and bring to the table. This is unfair and a bad thing for society, but also a fact to deal with.
If we wanted to try to address the unfairness and disparity, that seems wonderful, but simply recruiting people from less privileged groups doesn’t accomplish what is needed. Some obvious additional parts of the puzzle include needing to provide actual financial security to the less privileged people, helping them build networks outside of EA with influential people, and coaching and feedback.
Those all seem great, but I’m uncertain it’s a reasonable use of the community’s limited financial resources—and we should nonetheless acknowledge this as a serious problem.
Just to add to this (or maybe just say it in different terms)
I think that EA, when taken to certain logical conclusions, can seem ruthless and cold-hearted.
Here, it’s very difficult to optimize for both:
1. We want to make sure that we hire people such that we get the best straightforward ROI.
2. We want to make sure that the process is “fair” for applicants in some larger moralistic way.
There’s often tradeoffs here. Optimizing for (1) often comes with doing inexpensive and fast searches for talent, then paying the least that you need to. Optimizing for (2) often comes with extensive application processes and higher costs.
I think that the question is complex and nuanced, so I wouldn’t recommend going completely on the side of (1). At the same time, I could understand that a lot of people nervous about maximizing EV would generally stay close to (1).
I don’t find it concerning at all.
People who don’t come from privileged backgrounds (e.g. the 700 million people living on less of $2.15/day) don’t have the resources to worry about helping others effectively, the vast majority doesn’t speak English, and so on.
Random anecdote: I’m in a hospital for a minor visit right now, and I don’t find it concerning at all that many doctors here are likely to be from privileged backgrounds