For Meta/​cause prioritisation/​rationality I would downgrade the labour value estimates by ~half because:
Apart from full-time EA staff at meta orgs, the bulk of people/​ who would have listed this cause area are volunteer group organisers who would put themselves as working on this area are doing organising part-time
Unlike other causes, it is easier to work on movement building part-time, so I would guess this issue is more or less unique to meta.
At a guess I’d say the number of equivalent full-time people is probably ~450 people (likely less)
I would suggest downgrading the $ value from $88 million to maybe $45 million
This would reduce the portion of meta to 12%, suggesting it’s even further (11% instead of 6%) from the optimal allocation
For Meta/​cause prioritisation/​rationality I would downgrade the labour value estimates by ~half because:
Apart from full-time EA staff at meta orgs, the bulk of people/​ who would have listed this cause area are volunteer group organisers who would put themselves as working on this area are doing organising part-time
Unlike other causes, it is easier to work on movement building part-time, so I would guess this issue is more or less unique to meta.
At a guess I’d say the number of equivalent full-time people is probably ~450 people (likely less)
I would suggest downgrading the $ value from $88 million to maybe $45 million
This would reduce the portion of meta to 12%, suggesting it’s even further (11% instead of 6%) from the optimal allocation
Seems reasonable.
Salaries are also lower than in AI.
You could make a similar argument about animal welfare, though, I think.