Dave Banerjee 🔸

Karma: 397

I am an associate researcher at IAPS, where I research AI-driven power concentration, compute governance, and AI security. Previously, I was a GovAI summer fellow, participant in ARENA 5.0, hardware security research assistant through the SPAR program, and security engineer at a hedge fund. I graduated from Columbia University in December 2024, where I studied computer science.

All views expressed here are my own.

Leave anonymous feedback here!

Dave Banerjee 🔸 29 Jan 2026 3:26 UTC
2 points
1 ∶ 1
in reply to: Yarrow Bouchard 🔸’s comment on: Unfalsifiable stories of doom
Why are they paid so much?

Dave Banerjee 🔸 12 Nov 2025 16:21 UTC
3 points
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: mtths’s comment on: The Protein Problem
Does this take bioavailability into account? IIUC, humans can’t absorb 100% of plant based proteins, while we can absorb nearly 100% of animal-based proteins. The upshot is that your spreadsheet isn’t tracking the actual amount of protein human bodies will absorb

Dave Banerjee 🔸 27 Oct 2025 17:15 UTC
14 points
0 ∶ 0
on: More animal farming increases animal welfare if soil animals have negative lives?
(Caveat: I haven’t actually read the post and have not voted on the post. I am inclined to believe that the OP’s methodology is generally good given the OP’s track record of publishing high-quality posts and comments. It could be the case that this post is an outlier and is actually poorly argued—hence the downvotes)
For those who are downvoting this post, could you please explain why you’re downvoting? Off the top of my head, here are some reasons for why people would be downvoting:
1. You disagree with the conclusions of the post (in which case, it usually makes more sense to disagree-vote)
2. You disagree with the methodology / think that the methodology is flawed (in which case, a downvote is likely justified)
3. You feel like the OP “spams” the EA forum with similar arguments and that each new post is not adding value on the margin (in which case, it probably makes sense to downvote?)
  1. If this is how you feel, I’m not sure what the OP should do in response. Should the OP stop posting?

Dave Banerjee 🔸 15 Jul 2025 12:41 UTC
1 point
2 ∶ 0
on: July ’25 EA Newsletter Poll
It is possible to rationally prioritise between causes without engaging deeply on philosophical issues
Population axiology is a major crux for cause prio. Additionally, different moral views on wild animals massively changes cause prio.

Dave Banerjee 🔸 25 Jun 2025 14:02 UTC
2 points
1 ∶ 1
on: Debate: Morality is Objective
Morality is Objective
Roughly speaking, I find emotivism to be the most convincing metaethical theory