I agree that figure is really uncertain. Another issue is that the mean is driven by the tails.
For that reason, I mostly prefer to look at funding and the percentage of people separately, rather than the combined figure—though I thought I should provide the combined figure as well.
On the specifics:
I’d guess >20 people pursuing direct work could make >$10 million per year if they tried earning to give
That seems plausible, though jtbc the relevant reference class is the 7,000 most engaged EAs rather than the people currently doing (or about to start doing) direct work. I think that group might in expectation donate several fold-less than the narrower reference class.
I agree that figure is really uncertain. Another issue is that the mean is driven by the tails.
For that reason, I mostly prefer to look at funding and the percentage of people separately, rather than the combined figure—though I thought I should provide the combined figure as well.
On the specifics:
That seems plausible, though jtbc the relevant reference class is the 7,000 most engaged EAs rather than the people currently doing (or about to start doing) direct work. I think that group might in expectation donate several fold-less than the narrower reference class.
Thanks, agreed!