How do you apply isoelastic utility to real world consumption/income values? For, say, calculating “equivalent sacrifice” donation amounts for people with different incomes.
When I’ve tried to apply the formula, incomes as different as $10k and $80k both seem to equal “almost 2.0 utility”, and I don’t know what to do with this.
Sounds worthwhile. I’m curious why this is restricted to the US population?
Hi Patrick, thanks for your comment and message. Do you think there are parts of the “assessing and onboarding candidates” problem that are distinctive to EA organisations/efforts?
If the problems apply to hiring organisations generally, it’s more likely that the need could be addressed by existing generic solutions with large markets (e.g. recruitment SaaS). If not, a niche solution could be promising.
Thanks for your comment Harrison. It looks like a really interesting problem you’re working on. In my experience, summaries and visualisation can be really powerful for coordination and alignment (of humans, let alone AIs!)
I’ll take a look at the links you’ve provided to learn more.
Thanks for sharing this, I really enjoyed it.
I did some “customer” research around effective giving a year or so back and found some similar themes.
Engaged EAs already seem to have what they need. Most other people give small amounts to affirm/signal their values, with little regard for impact. It is indeed easy to think of things that “should exist” but people don’t want!