I personally like Willâs writing and I think heâs a good speaker. But I do find it weird that millions were spent on promoting WWOTF.[1] I find that weird on its own (how can you be so confident itâs impactful?), but even more so when comparing WWOTF to The Precipice which is in my opinion (and from my impression many othersâ opinion as well) a much better and more impactful book. I donât know if Ben shares these thoughts or if he has any others.
Edit to add: I vaguely remember seeing a source other than Torres. But as long as I canât find it you can disregard this comment. I do think promoting the book was/âis a lot more likely to be net positive than net negative, Iâm still even promoting the book myself. Itâs just the amount of money Iâm concerned about compared to other causes. But as long as I donât have a figure, I canât comment.
Just to be clear, I think marketing spending for a book is pretty reasonable. I think WWOTF was not a very good book, since it was really quite confused about AI Risk and described a methodology that I think basically no one adheres to and as such gave a lot of people a mistaken impression of how the longtermist part of the EA community actually thinks, but I think if I was in Willâs shoes and thought it was a really important book and contribution, I think spending a substantial amount of money on marketing seems pretty reasonable to me.
Itâs not clear where they take the information about an âenormous promotional budget of roughly $10 millionâ from. Not saying that it is untrue, but also unclear why Torres would have this information.
The implication is also, that the promotional spending came out of EA pockets. But part of it might also be promotional spending by the book publisher.
ETA: I found another article by Torres that discusses the claim in a bit more detail.
MacAskill, meanwhile, has more money at his fingertips than most of us make in a lifetime. Left unmentioned during his âDaily Showâ appearance: he hired several PR firms to promote his book, one of which was paid $12,000 per month, according to someone with direct knowledge of the matter. MacAskillâs team, this person tells me, even floated a total promotional budget ceiling of $10 million â a staggering number â thanks partly to financial support from the tech multibillionaire Dustin Moskovitz, cofounder of Facebook and a major funder of EA.
I donât believe the $10m claim. Indeed, I donât even see how it would be possible to spend that much without buying a Super Bowl ad. At $12k a month, you would have to hire nearly 140 PR firms for 6 months to add up to $10m. Perhaps someone added an extra zero or two . . .
Thanks Jeroen thatâs a fair point I think it was weird too.
Even if the wrong book was plugged though, it doesnât feel like a net harm activity though, and surely doesnât negate his good writing and speaking? Iâm sure weâll hear more!
I personally like Willâs writing and I think heâs a good speaker. But I do find it weird that millions were spent on promoting WWOTF.[1]I find that weird on its own (how can you be so confident itâs impactful?), but even more so when comparing WWOTF to The Precipice which is in my opinion (and from my impression many othersâ opinion as well) a much better and more impactful book. I donât know if Ben shares these thoughts or if he has any others.Edit to add: I vaguely remember seeing a source other than Torres. But as long as I canât find it you can disregard this comment. I do think promoting the book was/âis a lot more likely to be net positive than net negative, Iâm still even promoting the book myself. Itâs just the amount of money Iâm concerned about compared to other causes. But as long as I donât have a figure, I canât comment.
Canât find the source for this, so correct me if Iâm wrong!
Just to be clear, I think marketing spending for a book is pretty reasonable. I think WWOTF was not a very good book, since it was really quite confused about AI Risk and described a methodology that I think basically no one adheres to and as such gave a lot of people a mistaken impression of how the longtermist part of the EA community actually thinks, but I think if I was in Willâs shoes and thought it was a really important book and contribution, I think spending a substantial amount of money on marketing seems pretty reasonable to me.
The only source for this claim Iâve ever found was Emile P. Torresâs article What âlongtermismâ gets wrong about climate change.
Itâs not clear where they take the information about an âenormous promotional budget of roughly $10 millionâ from. Not saying that it is untrue, but also unclear why Torres would have this information.
The implication is also, that the promotional spending came out of EA pockets. But part of it might also be promotional spending by the book publisher.
ETA: I found another article by Torres that discusses the claim in a bit more detail.
That âfloatedâ is so weasely!
I donât believe the $10m claim. Indeed, I donât even see how it would be possible to spend that much without buying a Super Bowl ad. At $12k a month, you would have to hire nearly 140 PR firms for 6 months to add up to $10m. Perhaps someone added an extra zero or two . . .
Thanks Jeroen thatâs a fair point I think it was weird too.
Even if the wrong book was plugged though, it doesnât feel like a net harm activity though, and surely doesnât negate his good writing and speaking? Iâm sure weâll hear more!