There are some hack-ey scientometric search strategies that I got a bit of mileage out to generate a few items on the list, like:
having Google Scholar alerts (I’ve experimented with different Google scholar alerts (a complete old list is here). I currently only have thefollowing alerts:
“USD trillion” OR “US trillion” OR “trillion USD” OR “trillion dollar”
“end of civilization” OR “collapse of civilization” OR “survival of civilization” OR “survival of humanity” OR “human survival” OR “survival of human” OR “survival of the human” OR “global collapse” OR “historical collapse” OR “catastrophic collapse” OR “global disaster” OR “existential threat” OR “catastrophic harm”
“per death averted” OR “per life saved”
Using Semantic Scholar to scientists find ‘heavily influenced’ for instance OpenPhil grantees and work on similar * topics at reputable universities
But more generally I think more people could find things to fund like this by just starting a Google doc themselves and then add items to the doc by looking at the world (and the news) with open eyes and maybe through a particular lense (see whether some things would score well on the ITN framework, are global public goods, are related to main causes problem profiles , cause x-risk etc.). I think people should just generally be more attentive where one can donate (and what to do—because incidentally some of the orgs on this list might worth working for). In particular, people should look at opportunities within their field of expertise that they are in a unique position to assess.
Part of me feels that on some level, recent efforts to reduce research and critical thinking time on what is most effective to fund, such as donor lotteries and outsourcing donation decisions to experts, are actually quite worrying trends within effective altruism. I think what we need is not fewer people thinking how to do the most good, not less people having doing research and having a discussion on where to donate and what to do, but rather more.
Would you be willing to comment a bit on the search strategies you used to generate this list? I think it would be highly useful.
Excellent question!
There are some hack-ey scientometric search strategies that I got a bit of mileage out to generate a few items on the list, like:
having Google Scholar alerts (I’ve experimented with different Google scholar alerts (a complete old list is here). I currently only have thefollowing alerts:
“USD trillion” OR “US trillion” OR “trillion USD” OR “trillion dollar”
“end of civilization” OR “collapse of civilization” OR “survival of civilization” OR “survival of humanity” OR “human survival” OR “survival of human” OR “survival of the human” OR “global collapse” OR “historical collapse” OR “catastrophic collapse” OR “global disaster” OR “existential threat” OR “catastrophic harm”
“per death averted” OR “per life saved”
Using Semantic Scholar to scientists find ‘heavily influenced’ for instance OpenPhil grantees and work on similar * topics at reputable universities
But more generally I think more people could find things to fund like this by just starting a Google doc themselves and then add items to the doc by looking at the world (and the news) with open eyes and maybe through a particular lense (see whether some things would score well on the ITN framework, are global public goods, are related to main causes problem profiles , cause x-risk etc.). I think people should just generally be more attentive where one can donate (and what to do—because incidentally some of the orgs on this list might worth working for). In particular, people should look at opportunities within their field of expertise that they are in a unique position to assess.
Part of me feels that on some level, recent efforts to reduce research and critical thinking time on what is most effective to fund, such as donor lotteries and outsourcing donation decisions to experts, are actually quite worrying trends within effective altruism. I think what we need is not fewer people thinking how to do the most good, not less people having doing research and having a discussion on where to donate and what to do, but rather more.