[Any 80,000 problem areas and career paths—or the additional problem areas and career ideas they mention—that are not directly covered by existing tags]
I haven’t yet looked through these problem areas and career paths/ideas with this in mind, to see what’s not covered by existing tags and what the arguments for and against creating new tags for these things would be.
(Feel free to comment yourself with specific tag ideas drawn from the 80k problem areas and career paths, or the additional ones they mention.)
80k highlight this a potentially important area (though it’s not one of their top priorities)
The small set of (maybe-not-trustworthy) estimates we have suggest nanotech/APM is decently likely to be among the top 10 largest existential risks we know of (given usual ways of classifying things), and perhaps smaller only than AI and bio
Overlaps with EA funding and probably some other entries. But that entry is quite broad, and this entry could also cover things like how useful grantmaking is, how to test fit for it, best practices for grantmaking, etc. (which I’m not sure fit perfectly in EA funding).
Would overlap with vetting constraints if we make that entry (I proposed it elsewhere on this post).
I still think it’d probably be good for someone to go through 80k articles and see which topics covered warrant a Forum wiki entry
In many cases, the entry’s name and scope might differ a little from the 80k one. E.g. we might want to go with academia and think tanks rather than 80k’s academic research and think tank research
I now realise that, while doing that, it’d also be cool if the person could add 80k links in the Bibliography / Further reading sections of relevant entries
E.g., I just added a link to an 80k article from our Academia entry
[Any 80,000 problem areas and career paths—or the additional problem areas and career ideas they mention—that are not directly covered by existing tags]
I haven’t yet looked through these problem areas and career paths/ideas with this in mind, to see what’s not covered by existing tags and what the arguments for and against creating new tags for these things would be.
(Feel free to comment yourself with specific tag ideas drawn from the 80k problem areas and career paths, or the additional ones they mention.)
(Update: I’ve now made this tag.)
Nanotechnology or Atomically Precise Manufacturing
Arguments against:
Maybe a little niche?
Somewhat well-covered by Existential Risk?
Arguments for:
Not super niche
80k highlight this a potentially important area (though it’s not one of their top priorities)
The small set of (maybe-not-trustworthy) estimates we have suggest nanotech/APM is decently likely to be among the top 10 largest existential risks we know of (given usual ways of classifying things), and perhaps smaller only than AI and bio
Update: I’ve now made this entry
Grantmaking
Overlaps with EA funding and probably some other entries. But that entry is quite broad, and this entry could also cover things like how useful grantmaking is, how to test fit for it, best practices for grantmaking, etc. (which I’m not sure fit perfectly in EA funding).
Would overlap with vetting constraints if we make that entry (I proposed it elsewhere on this post).
I think this entry makes sense. Maybe effective altruism funding should be made more precise, but that’s a separate issue.
Just want to note that:
I still think it’d probably be good for someone to go through 80k articles and see which topics covered warrant a Forum wiki entry
In many cases, the entry’s name and scope might differ a little from the 80k one. E.g. we might want to go with academia and think tanks rather than 80k’s academic research and think tank research
I now realise that, while doing that, it’d also be cool if the person could add 80k links in the Bibliography / Further reading sections of relevant entries
E.g., I just added a link to an 80k article from our Academia entry
(Update: I’ve now made this tag.)
Think tanks
Could draw on and link to this 80k article: https://80000hours.org/career-reviews/think-tank-research/
(Update: I’ve now made this tag.)
Space (or maybe Space Governance, or Space Governance & Colonisation, or something along those lines)
“Governance of outer space” is mentioned by 80k here.
Would perhaps just be a subset of Long-Term Future. But perhaps a sufficiently large and important subset to warrant its own tag.
Some posts this should include:
Will we eventually be able to colonize other stars? Notes from a preliminary review
Space governance is important, tractable and neglected
Off-Earth Governance
An Informal Review of Space Exploration
Maybe Lunar Colony
Maybe Does Utilitarian Longtermism Imply Directed Panspermia?