For me the reputational risks that Jack Lewars mentioned worry me a lot. Like how will the media portray effective altruism in the future? Weâre definitely going be seen as less sympathetic in leftist circles, being funded by billionaires and all.
Another concern for me is how this will change what type of people weâll attract to the movement. In the past the movement attracted people who were willing to live on a small amount of money because they care so much about others in this world. Now Iâm worried that there will be more people who are less aligned with the values, who are in it at least partly for the money.
In another way it feels unfair. Why do I get to ask for 10k with a good chance of success, while friends of mine struggling with money who arenât EA aligned canât? I donât feel any more special or deserving than them in a way. I feel unfairly privileged somehow.
Thereâs also this icky feeling I get with accepting money: what if my project isnât better than cash transfers to the extreme poor? Even if the probabilities of success are high enough, the thought of just âwasting moneyâ while it could have gone to extremely poor people massively improving their lives just saddens me.
Iâm not trying to make logical arguments here for or against something, Iâm just sharing the feelings and worries going through my head.
I think itâs good that this is being discussed publicly for the world to see. Then it at least doesnât seem to non-EAâs who read this that weâre all completely comfortable with it. Iâm still of the opinion that all this money is great and positive news for the world and Iâm very grateful for the FTX Future Fund, but it does come with these worries.
Why do I get to ask for 10k with a good chance of success, while friends of mine struggling with money who arenât EA aligned canât? I donât feel any more special or deserving than them in a way. I feel unfairly privileged somehow.
I appreciate that youâre not trying to make logical arguments, but rather share your feelings. But in any event, my view is that this isnât an important consideration.
If theyâre doing something thatâs high-impact, then there might be such a caseâbut I assume you mean that they are not. And I think itâs better to look at a global scaleâand on such a scale, most people in the West are doing relatively well. So I donât think thatâs the group we should be worried about neglecting.
Can someone clarify this âtaking money from billionaires badâ thing? I know some people are against billionaires existing, but surely diverting money from them to altruistic causes would be the ideal outcome for someone who doesnât want that money siloed? The only reason I can think of (admittedly I donât know a lot about real leftism, economics, etc.) that someone wouldnât want to, assuming said billionaire isnât e.g. micromanaging for evil purposes, is a fear of moral contaminationâor rather, social-moral contamination⌠Being contaminated with the social rejection and animosity that the billionaire âcarriesâ within said complaining group. To me this seems like a type of reputation management that is so costly as to be unethical/âimmoral. Itâs like, âIâm afraid people wonât like me if I talk to Johnny, so I canât transport Johnnyâs fifty dollars to the person panhandling outside.â Surely we can set that sort of thing aside for the sake of actual material progress? Am I missing something? Because if it essentially amounts to âJohnny is unpopular and if I talk to him I might become unpopular too,â we shouldnât set a norm of operating under those fears. That seems cowardly.
Hi Jeroen, thank you for a wonderfully worded comment. I think this is an excellent overview of different feelings of uneasiness people have surrounding the influx of funding within EA. I share most of these feelings, and know other that do.
The logical arguments these feelings relate to are another discussion (I have many thoughts), for now I find it really interesting data to see other people are experiencing feelings of uneasiness and why.
For me the reputational risks that Jack Lewars mentioned worry me a lot. Like how will the media portray effective altruism in the future? Weâre definitely going be seen as less sympathetic in leftist circles, being funded by billionaires and all.
I donât have a satisfying answer to this that calms my worries, but one response could be that the the damage done to the reputation of EA wonât outweigh the good being done by all the money that goes to good causes.
Another concern for me is how this will change what type of people weâll attract to the movement. In the past the movement attracted people who were willing to live on a small amount of money because they care so much about others in this world. Now Iâm worried that there will be more people who are less aligned with the values, who are in it at least partly for the money.
Donât have a good answer to this. Perhaps just that Iâm overestimating the scale of this happening.
In another way it feels unfair. Why do I get to ask for 10k with a good chance of success, while friends of mine struggling with money who arenât EA aligned canât? I donât feel any more special or deserving than them in a way. I feel unfairly privileged somehow.
Stefan Schubert worded it well: âI think itâs better to look at a global scaleâand on such a scale, most people in the West are doing relatively well. So I donât think thatâs the group we should be worried about neglecting.â
Thereâs also this icky feeling I get with accepting money: what if my project isnât better than cash transfers to the extreme poor? Even if the probabilities of success are high enough, the thought of just âwasting moneyâ while it could have gone to extremely poor people massively improving their lives just saddens me.
This is just me being risk averse. Even if an EV calculation works out, itâs difficult shake off the uncomfortable feeling of potentially being one of the unsuccesful projects as part of hits-based giving.
For me the reputational risks that Jack Lewars mentioned worry me a lot. Like how will the media portray effective altruism in the future? Weâre definitely going be seen as less sympathetic in leftist circles, being funded by billionaires and all.
Another concern for me is how this will change what type of people weâll attract to the movement. In the past the movement attracted people who were willing to live on a small amount of money because they care so much about others in this world. Now Iâm worried that there will be more people who are less aligned with the values, who are in it at least partly for the money.
In another way it feels unfair. Why do I get to ask for 10k with a good chance of success, while friends of mine struggling with money who arenât EA aligned canât? I donât feel any more special or deserving than them in a way. I feel unfairly privileged somehow.
Thereâs also this icky feeling I get with accepting money: what if my project isnât better than cash transfers to the extreme poor? Even if the probabilities of success are high enough, the thought of just âwasting moneyâ while it could have gone to extremely poor people massively improving their lives just saddens me.
Iâm not trying to make logical arguments here for or against something, Iâm just sharing the feelings and worries going through my head.
I think itâs good that this is being discussed publicly for the world to see. Then it at least doesnât seem to non-EAâs who read this that weâre all completely comfortable with it. Iâm still of the opinion that all this money is great and positive news for the world and Iâm very grateful for the FTX Future Fund, but it does come with these worries.
I appreciate that youâre not trying to make logical arguments, but rather share your feelings. But in any event, my view is that this isnât an important consideration.
If theyâre doing something thatâs high-impact, then there might be such a caseâbut I assume you mean that they are not. And I think itâs better to look at a global scaleâand on such a scale, most people in the West are doing relatively well. So I donât think thatâs the group we should be worried about neglecting.
Can someone clarify this âtaking money from billionaires badâ thing? I know some people are against billionaires existing, but surely diverting money from them to altruistic causes would be the ideal outcome for someone who doesnât want that money siloed? The only reason I can think of (admittedly I donât know a lot about real leftism, economics, etc.) that someone wouldnât want to, assuming said billionaire isnât e.g. micromanaging for evil purposes, is a fear of moral contaminationâor rather, social-moral contamination⌠Being contaminated with the social rejection and animosity that the billionaire âcarriesâ within said complaining group. To me this seems like a type of reputation management that is so costly as to be unethical/âimmoral. Itâs like, âIâm afraid people wonât like me if I talk to Johnny, so I canât transport Johnnyâs fifty dollars to the person panhandling outside.â Surely we can set that sort of thing aside for the sake of actual material progress? Am I missing something? Because if it essentially amounts to âJohnny is unpopular and if I talk to him I might become unpopular too,â we shouldnât set a norm of operating under those fears. That seems cowardly.
Hi Jeroen, thank you for a wonderfully worded comment. I think this is an excellent overview of different feelings of uneasiness people have surrounding the influx of funding within EA. I share most of these feelings, and know other that do.
The logical arguments these feelings relate to are another discussion (I have many thoughts), for now I find it really interesting data to see other people are experiencing feelings of uneasiness and why.
My personal responses to these:
I donât have a satisfying answer to this that calms my worries, but one response could be that the the damage done to the reputation of EA wonât outweigh the good being done by all the money that goes to good causes.
Donât have a good answer to this. Perhaps just that Iâm overestimating the scale of this happening.
Stefan Schubert worded it well: âI think itâs better to look at a global scaleâand on such a scale, most people in the West are doing relatively well. So I donât think thatâs the group we should be worried about neglecting.â
This is just me being risk averse. Even if an EV calculation works out, itâs difficult shake off the uncomfortable feeling of potentially being one of the unsuccesful projects as part of hits-based giving.