I start projects that I find exciting and fun. I now run the Prague Fall Season, Fixed Point and Epistea.
Previously, I co-led the Prague 2022 CFAR Workshops series, led the Czech EA Association, and organized EAGxPrague 2022.
I start projects that I find exciting and fun. I now run the Prague Fall Season, Fixed Point and Epistea.
Previously, I co-led the Prague 2022 CFAR Workshops series, led the Czech EA Association, and organized EAGxPrague 2022.
I do not know this article but here are my thoughts on this problem, having worked at a private foundation myself.
The amount of money awarded per staff lies on a scale. On one end a foundation could just make 1 massive grant a year to one organization. On the other end, make millions of super small grants. As organizations navigate this scale from one extreme to the other, in my experience these are some of their considerations:
Diversifying the portfolio of grants—if one does not succeed, there are still many to possibly have high impact
Limited expertise of staff
Limited responsibility of staff—it seems that more staff are a better system of checks and balances where corruption or poor judgement are discovered easily
Field saturation—in my foundation, there were certain areas that we have kind of already funded to what we believed was their maximum potential. If we suddenly had twice the money, we would not have given it to the same area. We would need to research and justify a new cause area.
Ultimately, I think that there is a sense of “wanting to know something the others do not know” or being original in some way. One could have a foundation that simply funds high quality proposals that were not funded simply due to lack of resources by other funders. Super efficient, just needs a small grants and operations team. Yet, it lacks mission and is generally unappealing to the board and founders.
I do not have experience with WSDNs but based on your description, the Czech Association for EA seems to have this model. The structure is such that people sign up to be members, members elect leadership and leadership reports back to the members.
The biggest difference seems to be that our members are not only employees but volunteers or general supporters.
In my experience is not so much that they person does not grasp the ethical argument through empathy, many people do. The reason they do not change their behaviour is mostly because it is normalized in society. People do not usually realize it in the moment and so it is not what you would often hear as an answer but uppon reflection, that is what many vegetarians realize—they did understand they were acting wrong but it seemed like it was not a big deal because everyone was doing it.
Hi Lewis, since this is AMA, this one is not EA related.
I’ve spend most of my teenage and college years as a competitive international debater. How do you look back at your debate experience? The good and the bad. Would you recommend that EAs (and more people in general) take up debate? Or would you rather see it be replaced with some other form of structured discussion?
Also, the WUDC finals are one of my favorite competitive debates of all time, I would often use it when coaching my teams. I’d love to hear your take on it. What was it like for you to prop a topic which was already quite broadly opposed in society (making abortion illegal)? And what was going through your mind when you heard James present their definition and approach (that a fetus may very well be alive since conception but the mother has a right to kill it regardless)?
This is a great initiative! I just want to point out that if this is aimed at international students, it is quite difficult to accurately estimate their GPA. Also, they would not need to do for UK applications. You will be able to understand their academic performance from the transcript but requiring a GPA may not give you the information you are looking for.
Ha, amusing indeed! Fixed now. :)
You pay for the ticket at the registration stage depending on what you can afford. The baseline price is 50 EUR and then you can apply a 25%, 50%, or 75% discount. You can also ask for financial assistance to be able to attend the conference.
I’m not aware of anything, in particular, happening in Prague that weekend that would explain the hotels in the downtown area being full. Prague is a very popular city that is coming back from two bad winters with COVID so it seems that people are simply eager to visit.
We did put together a guide on public transportation so people are comfortable booking outside of the city center and also had a couchsurfing table for people to advertise and look for spare accommodation.
We decided to do the conference in the city center because we think it is a beautiful area that we wanted to share with our attendees. There seems to be an existing tension in the community on whether to do conferences in large convention centers at an arbitrary location or in unique spaces which are an inherent part of the conference experience.
We were considering doing a group order for accommodation to help out the attendees but we did not have enough capacity on the team to do it. I’ve done this for another conference in the past and it is A LOT of work to assign people, deal with changes, communicate with the hotel etc.
My two cents about why people may be concerned about the decision-making process without having concrete details:
For instance, the initially advertised decision timeline of 2 weeks. While I appreciate the fast pace and the benefits that come with it, a complex system of review and decision-making is almost impossible to achieve at that timeline, especially given the interest in the program.
Moreover, that deadline was not met for all projects which is both good because clearly more time was needed and also bad because applicants’ expectations were not met and they needed to potentially change their plans for the projects because of the dealy. Additionally, it signals FTX’s poor understanding of either its capacity or the complexity of the grant-making process. Lack of either doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence.
I know you explain it later in the post, but I would prefer that the phrase “tell the person what you think their problems are” not be used to describe people offering doom. IMHO it’s very bad if people think about it this way.
The framing that seems more accurate to me is something like “why will this person have failed in their efforts?” Basically, how do you think they are doomed, hence the doom circle. You are trying to see how things are going to play out for them and should they not succeed, what happened?
Hi Brian, I hope that you’ll eventually be able to make it to the workshops, we certainly hope that there will be more next year.
Eventually, we would like to update the website but we have limited capacity and we were focused on getting the dates and applications out there as early as we knew they were happening so people could pencil in the dates. Now we are also running admissions, coordinating staff, working on content and logistics etc. Given all of this, it will likely take us a couple of more weeks to update.
Hi Gregory, I will be running these workshops together with John, so I’d like to respond to your comments.
I think that it is fair for you to post your warning/recommendation but as far as I can tell, today’s CFAR is quite different from the organization that you say demonstrated “gross negligence and utter corporate incompetence” in the past. You say that the evidence is sparse that anything has changed and I’m not sure about that but I’m also not the person to make that case because I’m not CFAR—I’m a CFAR developer running a project with other CFAR developers and a couple of CFAR core staff.
I can only speak for myself as one of the co-leads of this project and what I can say is that we see the skulls. They’re a bit hard to ignore since they’re everywhere! But that is exactly why we think we have enough of an understanding of what happened and how to learn from it. We are very much aware of the previous mistakes and believe that we can do better. And we want to try because we think these workshops are good and important and that we can do them well.
I generally think that people and organizations deserve second chances but ultimately it is for the people to decide. We will be fulfilling our role as event organizers by mitigating risks to our participants, to the extent that we reasonably can (based on CFAR’s past mistakes and also based on our own experience and judgment). And our participants will decide if they trust us enough to come to an immersive workshop with a bunch of other humans who they will interact with for 4.5 days.
I’d like to make a brief note on the importance of translating EA content because I’ve often encountered a general idea which is something like “as a movement, we are basically mainly interested in people who already speak English so they’d just read the original and the translation wouldn’t bring any additional benefit”.
An answer to this could be a standalone forum post, but in short:
There are in fact, very talented people who could make great contributions to the movement who for a number of reasons don’t communicate in English that well. If our outreach is in English only, we will likely miss them.
Even if someone seems quite competent in their command of English but it may still impact their willingness to consume English content, and even if they do, they may not enjoy it as much because their comprehension is not 100%.
It seems that reading text in your primary language lands differently, especially when you want the reader to connect with the material emotionally. Reading it in your primary language seems to increase the extent to which you’re able to internalize the message (especially for someone with low comprehension skills in English)
A lot of EA material is already targeted at the English-speaking world and it can feel alienating—like it’s not REALLY meant for me. Sure, EA sounds interesting but it’s something for OTHER people, not me, living in *insert a small foreign city*.
Could I record the audio of my own post?
Since I’m running the project in question (not Wytham Abbey), I would like to share my perspective as well. (I reached out to the author of the comment, Bob, in a DM asking him to remove the previously posted addresses and we chatted briefly about some of these points privately but I also want to share my answers publicly.)
ESPR can’t return the property or the money at the moment because there is currently no mechanism that we are aware of that would make it possible to legally send money “back to FTX” such that it would reliably make its way back to customers who lost their money. We will wait and see how the bankruptcy proceedings play out which will likely take years. For now, I have a responsibility to the staff, to the property, and to the project.
This project is not an EA project. It covers a broader scope of world-improving activities and organizations. It is not part of the Czech EA organization. I also personally don’t own the property—I’m the CEO of a separate organization (not ESPR, not CZEA) that owns it.
You ask that this purchase be disclosed publicly—this was always the plan. The transaction is very fresh and has only been finalized this week. We are in the process of making adjustments to the place before announcing its existence and an open call for applications for events.
Much has been discussed on the forum recently about the cost-effectiveness of purchasing property and about optics. I’ve been running various events for over 10 years and I’ve seen firsthand how places, where they happen, influence their outcomes. I’ve also seen how the lack of appropriate and ready-to-use venues was the reason for great events not happening. I wanted to create an inspiring and functional space that can help people to think, discuss and create good things—I’ve been developing the idea over the last couple of years. I’m happy to go into more details about the project and its vision but again, I would like to be able to officially announce it first.
This is an experimental project which has a theory of change that is well thought out but remains uncertain. We will see what happens once we are up and running and able to see the outcomes. Should it be the case that it seems like it doesn’t generate sufficient value and broadly speaking “doesn’t work” it will most certainly be reconsidered. The property can be sold and the money can go toward other projects.
To give people some idea about the cost of EAGX’s: for Prague, where we had about 400 attendees, the cost was roughly £270 per person, and out of that, £120 was for food. Our venue didn’t have its own catering so we could arrange what we wanted on whatever scale we wanted. We could easily just do lunch and snacks.
Thank you for putting all of this together, I think it is a very useful post. I spent many years career coaching and advising people who were applying for jobs and I always stress this:
If you are not landing the job you want it is because of two main reasons:
a) You are not applying for the right jobs for you (you may be underqualified, overqualified, transitioning fields etc.)
b) Or you are in fact very well qualified but you are not good at presenting those qualifications to others, especially in a limited time and space.
Have you received any kind of feedback that would help you understand which was more common for you? If you think your case is a) then you need to find a different set of jobs to apply to—not better or worse, just different. If it is more b) then you may want to work on making sure that the reasons why you know you would be good at the job you are applying to translate into your resume, cover letter, interview etc.
I actually think it is quite common for people in the EA community to find themselves at a) because the jobs that are available to our community are very limited in numbers and scope. I think we need to expand the way we think about EA careers such that more people can find jobs that they enjoy which are also impactful.
You may also find yourself in b) because of cultural differences and bias. For example the job market in the US is very competitive and everyone is used to extremely inflating their resume and presenting themselves very confidently—which is not typical in some parts of Europe or Asia. Many recruiters and hiring managers also have bias against foreign applicants so part of the task is to present your qualities such that they come across accurately even at this disadvantage.