I definitely agree there are some arguments against, but I’m concerned they’re not strong enough to offset the downsides of setting up a new org.
Also, my understanding is that Envision is also narrow-base. They’re explicitly aiming at future leaders in tech. EA is aiming at that group plus others, so if anything is a wider base than Envision. Rather, Envision differs in being low-ask.
If envision really is only aiming at tech and adjacent undergrads I’ll be disappointed, but that wasn’t my read; what I see “leaders in tech development, policy, academia, and business”. So for instance I assume an high-flying Oxford PPE graduate with a side interest in tech would qualify*.
I think we might be talking past each other slightly on the base point though, when I said EA was narrow-base/high-ask I meant to imply that our available base is narrowed (a lot) by the high ask; it only appeals to people with a fairly strong to very strong altruistic bent. So I think I could sell Envision or something like it to a much wider cross-section of maths/comp sci types than I could EA in general (within JS, maybe 55% versus 20% to give you some idea of percentages).
*For non-UK readers, Oxford PPE graduates have fairly insane levels of penetration into the highest levels of UK politics.
I think we might be talking past each other slightly on the base point though, when I said EA was narrow-base/high-ask I meant to imply that our available base is narrowed (a lot) by the high ask; it only appeals to people with a fairly strong to very strong altruistic bent.
Ah, I got you.
Also just to clarify I was saying with Envision the audience is future leaders, whereas with EA it’s future leaders plus others; so that’s a sense in which EA has a broader audience.
Alex is correct, Envision is not only targeting future tech leaders, it’s targeting future leaders in tech development, policy, academia, and business.
Hey Alex,
I definitely agree there are some arguments against, but I’m concerned they’re not strong enough to offset the downsides of setting up a new org.
Also, my understanding is that Envision is also narrow-base. They’re explicitly aiming at future leaders in tech. EA is aiming at that group plus others, so if anything is a wider base than Envision. Rather, Envision differs in being low-ask.
If envision really is only aiming at tech and adjacent undergrads I’ll be disappointed, but that wasn’t my read; what I see “leaders in tech development, policy, academia, and business”. So for instance I assume an high-flying Oxford PPE graduate with a side interest in tech would qualify*.
I think we might be talking past each other slightly on the base point though, when I said EA was narrow-base/high-ask I meant to imply that our available base is narrowed (a lot) by the high ask; it only appeals to people with a fairly strong to very strong altruistic bent. So I think I could sell Envision or something like it to a much wider cross-section of maths/comp sci types than I could EA in general (within JS, maybe 55% versus 20% to give you some idea of percentages).
*For non-UK readers, Oxford PPE graduates have fairly insane levels of penetration into the highest levels of UK politics.
Ah, I got you.
Also just to clarify I was saying with Envision the audience is future leaders, whereas with EA it’s future leaders plus others; so that’s a sense in which EA has a broader audience.
Alex is correct, Envision is not only targeting future tech leaders, it’s targeting future leaders in tech development, policy, academia, and business.