EdoArad

Karma: 5,129

Hey! I’m Edo, married + 2 cats, I live in Tel-Aviv, Israel, and I feel weird writing about myself so I go meta.

I’m a mathematician, I love solving problems and helping people. My LinkedIn profile has some more stuff.

I’m a forum moderator, which mostly means that I care about this forum and about you! So let me know if there’s anything I can do to help.

I’m currently working full-time at EA Israel, doing independent research and project management. Currently mostly working on evaluating the impact of for-profit tech companies, but I have many projects and this changes rapidly.

EdoArad Apr 1, 2024, 12:34 PM
21 points
4 ∶ 0
on: The Centre for Effective Altruism is spinning out of the Centre for Effective Altruism
Re See-EA and understanding the community better, have you considered the community of Sea-EAs? Or maybe go big-tent and focus on rank-C EAs? Charity Entrepreneurship’s Alumni?

EdoArad Apr 1, 2024, 11:54 AM
21 points
4 ∶ 2
on: Introducing “Bribe Well”
I think in the US it’s called “Lobbying” and Open Phil has spent several hundred thousand dollars there

EdoArad Apr 1, 2024, 11:47 AM
12 points
1 ∶ 0
on: Cause Area Tier List
How about improving the climate of discussions on the forum?

EdoArad Apr 1, 2024, 11:31 AM
10 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: EdoArad’s comment on: EA is now scandal-constrained
(btw, I find it funny that I cringe internally more about posting 11 than about 9)

EdoArad Apr 1, 2024, 9:36 AM
3 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Medical Assistance in Dying for the Mentally Ill as a Cause Area for Negative Utilitarians
One key consideration for me is to what extent we think people who would choose to commit suicide, or people who have lived with a long treatment-resistant depression, are likely to recover and live a worthwhile life (and to what extent suicidal individuals can predict their future well-being).
The academic literature seems very lacking here. I found a couple of recent papers:
1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0005789421000228 (a 2021 review)
2. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=10503&context=etd (a 2022 master’s thesis on the topic, studying a cohort of 8,000 US veterans within which 400 had attempted suicide). It seems pessimistic, at a glance.

EdoArad Apr 1, 2024, 8:42 AM
5 points
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: NickLaing’s comment on: EA is now scandal-constrained
They probably have a large influence on prioritization. I’d check into ALLFED

EdoArad Apr 1, 2024, 8:16 AM
26 points
3 ∶ 1
in reply to: NickLaing’s comment on: EA is now scandal-constrained
9. EA should publicly support Israel’s war effort
10. Buy a large coal mine and employ the world’s poorest people
11. Only fund community builders who say they are longtermist
12. Publish the secret deal with Huel as EA’s main sponsor

EdoArad Apr 1, 2024, 6:27 AM
5 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Apply to be a Safety Engineer at Lockheed Martin!
Engienering at LM might be better than engineering LLMs

EdoArad Mar 17, 2024, 3:30 PM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Ben Millwood🔸’s comment on: In CEAs, when should we take the Expected Value?
Exactly!

EdoArad Mar 17, 2024, 3:29 PM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Joseph’s comment on: In CEAs, when should we take the Expected Value?
👍

EdoArad Mar 9, 2024, 3:34 PM
4 points
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: Elizabeth’s comment on: This is why people are reluctant to write on the EA Forum
If you or someone else wants to expand on this point, I’d be interested in understanding whether that’s really the case or in which ways it got better or worse

EdoArad Feb 10, 2024, 5:08 PM
1 point
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: EdoArad’s comment on: Ambitious Impact (AIM) - a new brand for Charity Entrepreneurship and our extended ecosystem!
wait, was it like that before??

EdoArad Feb 8, 2024, 7:57 PM
3 points
2 ∶ 1
on: Ambitious Impact (AIM) - a new brand for Charity Entrepreneurship and our extended ecosystem!
Love the Harry Potter color theme!

EdoArad Feb 7, 2024, 4:53 PM
43 points
6 ∶ 0
on: Introducing the Effektiv Spenden “Defending Democracy” fund
Is the issue highly polarized/politicized in Germany? Say, do you expect some people to engage less with your work as a result of “choosing sides”?
In EA Israel we tend to take more politically neutral approaches when engaging publicly, including in relation to the current war or to the large “pro-democratic” public protests (wiki). I’m curious about your attitude to reputational risks and the potential problem of “painting EA with leftist colors”.

EdoArad Feb 4, 2024, 3:28 PM
5 points
0 ∶ 0
on: A simple and generic framework for impact estimation and attribution
Usually we use purchase-parity adjustments when we look at the value of money, so there might be a subtle circular reasoning problem here. One issue for example is that there is no value in innovation (say, by designing a cheaper transportation service/product, people could end up paying less for the service so the revenue may decrease [while the profits could get higher]).
Another issue is that I don’t think this could take into account counterfactual impact.
Didn’t read through the whole thing yet, sorry if I missed how you addressed this issues! I love the idea of trying to find simpler ways of estimating impact!

EdoArad Jan 12, 2024, 7:28 AM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Prior knowledge elicitation: The past, present, and future [review paper 2023]
Seems like this was first published in 2021 but revised in 2023

EdoArad Jan 12, 2024, 7:06 AM
4 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: EdoArad’s comment on: Copenhagen Consensus Center’s best investment papers for the sustainable development goals
Also, CCC are using a discount rate of 8% (compared with 4% that’s common at least for CE)

EdoArad Jan 12, 2024, 6:56 AM
11 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Copenhagen Consensus Center’s best investment papers for the sustainable development goals
How should we compare their (CCC’s) cost-benefit estimates to GiveWell’s (GW’s) results?
I quickly spot two differences:
1. GW’s benefit estimates are in units of doubling of consumption (interventions are compared to direct cash transfers through Give Directly, itself measured in terms of doubling of consumption), whereas CCC’s estimates are in units of value of a statistical life.
2. CCC’s analyses are for large-scale government operations, so
  1. they don’t account for counterfactual investments,
  2. they encounter diminishing returns (compared to GW’s focus on the marginal dollar).
Points 1. and 2.a. are both indications that CCC’s cost-benefit ratios are higher than GW-esque’s cost-effectiveness ratios, while 2.b. goes to the other direction.
From the Tuberculosis paper, regarding value of a statistical life (VSL):
The GDP growth in this group of countries outpaces the population growth, so that the VSL grows rapidly over time. In constant 2020 US$ values, the benefit of an averted death is US$ 98,700 (2020), US$ 149,800 (2025), US$ 212,000 (2030), US$ 276,300 (2035), US$ 338,100 (2040), US$ 396,800 (2045), and US$ 456,000 (2050).
In comparison, GW estimates that one can save a life (or have equivalent impact) at about $5000. That’s a factor of ~20. [I think this is misleading, so I’d be interested in a more careful comparison here, directly comparing VSL to doubling of consumption].
I’m also not sure how exactly to account for the differences in 2.

EdoArad Jan 5, 2024, 9:34 AM
3 points
1 ∶ 0
in reply to: JoshuaBlake’s comment on: How We Plan to Approach Uncertainty in Our Cost-Effectiveness Models
Totally agree with the need for a more balanced and careful analysis!

EdoArad Jan 5, 2024, 9:30 AM
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: JoshuaBlake’s comment on: How We Plan to Approach Uncertainty in Our Cost-Effectiveness Models
The main point is that access management is more natively associated with the structure of the model in software settings. Say, you are less likely to release a model without its prerequisites.

But I agree that this could also be messed up in software environments, and that it’s mainly an issue of UI and culture. I guess I generally argue for a modeling environment that is “modeling-first” rather than something like “explainable-results-first”.