FWIW, I donât actually know what you mean/âbelieve here and whether itâs different to what the post already said, because:
The post said âfraction of longtermist effortâ but youâre saying âshare of highly-engaged EAsâ. Maybe youâre thinking the increased share should mostly come from highly engaged EAs who arenât currently focused on longtermist efforts? That could then be consistent with the post.
You said âfeels reasonableâ, which doesnât make it clear whether you think this actually should happen, it probably should happen, itâs 10% likely it should happen, it shouldnât happen but it wouldnât be unreasonable for it to happen, etc.
I do mean EAs with a longtermist focus. While writing about highly-engaged EAs, I had Benjamin Toddâs EAG talk in mind, in which he pointed out that only around 4% of highly-engaged EAs are working in bio.
And thanks for pointing out I should be more precise. To qualify my statement, Iâm 75% confident that this should happen.
FWIW, I donât actually know what you mean/âbelieve here and whether itâs different to what the post already said, because:
The post said âfraction of longtermist effortâ but youâre saying âshare of highly-engaged EAsâ. Maybe youâre thinking the increased share should mostly come from highly engaged EAs who arenât currently focused on longtermist efforts? That could then be consistent with the post.
You said âfeels reasonableâ, which doesnât make it clear whether you think this actually should happen, it probably should happen, itâs 10% likely it should happen, it shouldnât happen but it wouldnât be unreasonable for it to happen, etc.
I do mean EAs with a longtermist focus. While writing about highly-engaged EAs, I had Benjamin Toddâs EAG talk in mind, in which he pointed out that only around 4% of highly-engaged EAs are working in bio.
And thanks for pointing out I should be more precise. To qualify my statement, Iâm 75% confident that this should happen.