Jamie_Harris

• Jamie_Harris 9 Nov 2025 10:21 UTC

  30 points

  1 ∶ 0

  on: Jamie_Har­ris’s Shortform

  I built an interactive chicken welfare experience—try it and let me know what you think

  Ever wondered what “cage-free” actually means versus “free-range”? I just launched A Chicken’s World—a 5-minute interactive game where you experience four different farming systems from an egg-laying hen’s perspective, then guess which one you just lived through and how common that system is.

  Reading “67 square inches per hen” is one thing, but actually trying to move around in that space is another. My hope is that the interactive format makes welfare conditions visceral in a way that statistics don’t capture.

  The experience includes:

  • Walking through battery cage, cage-free, free-range, and pasture-raised systems

  • Cost-effectiveness data based on Rethink Priorities’ research on corporate campaigns

  • A willingness-to-pay element leading to an optional donation to THL via Farmkind

  

  I’d welcome feedback:

  • Any factual errors I should correct? (The comparative advantage of early adopters here! Most of the fact-finding and red-teaming was done by LLMs.)

  • What would make it more useful to you personally? (You’ll probably give me more useful feedback this way than if you try to model other users.)

  • What would make it work better as an outreach tool? (I built this with non-EA audiences in mind.)

  Try it: https://​​achickens.world/​​. (Backup link here if that doesn’t work.)

  

  PS thanks Claude for the code, plus THL, RP, Farmkind for doing the actual important work; I’m just making a fun tool. This was a misc personal project, nothing to do with my employer.

• Jamie_Harris 30 Sep 2025 20:04 UTC

  2 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: How cost-effec­tive are AI safety YouTu­bers?

  Very cool! No reply needed/​expected, just sharing a few misc reflections:

  I didn’t follow the reason for excluding Dwarkesh; you already have quality adjustments multipliers so you can just include him and apply the adjustments. (Id be interested to see, since I think it’s relevant, he has an influential audience, and he has solid revenue, which I think will lead to high cost-effectiveness in your model.)

  In the other direction: I’m not sure if your goal was to compare most cost-effective opportunities among current/​established YouTubers, but if you’re trying to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the overall intervention instead/​as well, then you’ll of course need to account for efforts that started but collapsed or didn’t gain much traction.

  Cool to see this analysis here though, and will likely be a useful reference/​comparison for some apps that the EA Infrastructure Fund gets!

• Jamie_Harris 24 Sep 2025 16:40 UTC

  6 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Yonatan Cale’s comment on: Gen­er­a­tive AI is not caus­ing YCom­bi­na­tor com­pa­nies to grow more quickly than usual (yet)

  On 2., this is a kind offer! Is there some way you’d be able and comfortable sharing some of these with participants in CEA’s ongoing career bootcamps?

  We have a fair few software engineers, current or former C-suite types, etc.

  (Or is there some way we could connect individuals with you?)

  Thanks!

• Jamie_Harris 31 Aug 2025 16:33 UTC

  4 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: JackM’s comment on: Fu­tures with digi­tal minds: Ex­pert fore­casts in 2025

  The brand new episode with Kyle Fish from Anthropic (released since you wrote this comment) discusses some reasons why AI Safety and AI welfare efforts might conflict or be mutually beneficial, if you’re interested!

• Jamie_Harris 23 Aug 2025 8:57 UTC

  30 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Jamie_Har­ris’s Shortform

  Make your high-impact career pivot: online bootcamp (apply by Sept 14)

  Many accomplished professionals want to make a bigger difference with their career, but don’t always know how to turn their skills into real-world impact.

  We (the Centre for Effective Altruism) have just launched a new, free, 4-day online career bootcamp designed to help with that.

  How it works:

  • Runs Sept 20–21 & 27–28 (weekends) or Oct 6–9 (weekdays)

  • Online, 6–8 hours/​day for 4 days

  • For accomplished professionals (most participants mid-career, 5+ years’ experience, but not a hard requirement)

  What you’ll get:

  • Evaluate your options: identify high-impact career paths that match your skills and challenge blind spots

  • Build your network: meet other experienced professionals pivoting into impact-focused roles

  • Feedback on CVs: draft, get feedback, and iterate on applications

  • Make real progress: send applications, make introductions, or scope projects during the bootcamp itself

  “It’s short, intense, and gives you a focused burst of momentum. You’ll come away with practical tools to clarify your next steps and job search direction.” — Cibeles, pilot participant

  Applications take ~30 mins and close Sept 14.

  If you’re interested yourself, please do apply! And if anyone comes to mind — colleagues, university friends, or others who’ve built strong skills and might be open to higher-impact work — we’d be grateful if you shared this with them.

• Jamie_Harris 4 Aug 2025 17:56 UTC

  3 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Karen Singleton’s comment on: An­i­mal ad­vo­cates should re­spond to trans­for­ma­tive AI maybe ar­riv­ing soon

  Thanks Karen! Interested if you have specific things in mind for implications of the economic angle? I can certainly see it playing into some of the “Predict how AI will change things, and try to make that go well for animals” predictions, or leading to more of an emphasis on “Shift towards all-inclusive AI safety”.

An­i­mal ad­vo­cates should re­spond to trans­for­ma­tive AI maybe ar­riv­ing soon

My im­pact-fo­cused ca­reer: you can cre­ate your own roles (?)

• Jamie_Harris 3 Jul 2025 22:29 UTC

  4 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Welfare tech should be de­vel­oped by welfare people

  Cool post!

  Misc thought that this seems analogous to some of the points/​ideas/​arguments in https://​​www.forethought.org/​​research/​​ai-tools-for-existential-security (albeit for different tech and to primarily address different problems)

• Jamie_Harris 3 Jul 2025 16:43 UTC

  7 points

  2 ∶ 0

  on: How Unoffi­cial Work Gets You Hired: Build­ing Your Sur­face Area for Serendipity

  I think this is a great explanation of an important dynamic and opportunity. I feel confident that doing the sorts of things explained in this post has benefited my career a lot.

  Appreciated the footnote about informal hiring having tradeoffs; it’s not clearly good that hiring often operates this way. But the good news is that “just start really trying to do useful/​impactful things” is not only helpful for the world, but helpful for people’s high-impact job search. A win-win!

• Jamie_Harris 28 Jun 2025 10:25 UTC

  3 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Ve­gan Challenges Are An Un­der­rated Lever For Diet Change

  This is cool! Cost-effectiveness estimates would be great, but given that they’re likely quite cheap per individual, my guess is that they work out as pretty cost-effective as long as we think that there is a real (average) long-term reduction in animal product consumption, and we don’t see the small animal replacement problem rear it’s head?

  (E.g. IIRC one problem is just that we often have to rely on self-report and it’s hard to rigorously assess what changes people really make, if any.)

  On that note, I’d be interested if you have an impression of the quality of the studies, and whether you indeed expect this kind of effect?

  (Also, could you explain what you mean by “retention rate”? Seems pretty important.)

• Jamie_Harris 5 Jun 2025 20:11 UTC

  7 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: In­tro­duc­ing Free­lanc­ing For Good: a com­mu­nity, di­rec­tory and job board for im­pact-driven freelancers

  Exciting! Great if you can connect and support impact-focused freelancers to achieve their goals.

  As someone who may be looking for freelance support in the next few weeks/​months, I’m wondering what I gain by posting or using the directory here, rather than other (not-altruism-focused) platforms like Fiverr, Upwork, etc?

• Jamie_Harris 1 Jun 2025 19:09 UTC

  39 points

  4 ∶ 0

  on: Jamie_Har­ris’s Shortform

  Productive conference meetup format for 5-15 people in 30-60 minutes

  I ran an impromptu meetup at a conference this weekend, where 2 of the ~8 attendees told me that they found this an unusually useful/​productive format and encouraged me to share it as an EA Forum shortform. So here I am, obliging them:

  • Intros… but actually useful

    • Name

    • Brief background or interest in the topic

    • 1 thing you could possibly help others in this group with

    • 1 thing you hope others in this group could help you with

    • NOTE: I will ask you to act on these imminently so you need to pay attention, take notes etc

    • [Facilitator starts and demonstrates by example]

  • Round of any quick wins: anything you heard where someone asked for some help and you think you can help quickly, e.g. a resource, idea, offer? Say so now!

  • Round of quick requests: Anything where anyone would like to arrange a 1:1 later with someone else here, or request anything else?

  • If 15+ minutes remaining:

    • Brainstorm whole-group discussion topics for the remaining time. Quickly gather in 1-5 topic ideas in less than 5 minutes.

    • Show of hands voting for each of the proposed topics.

    • Discuss most popular topics for 8-15 minutes each. (It might just be one topic)

  • If less than 15 minutes remaining:

    • Quickly pick one topic for group discussion yourself.

    • Or just finish early? People can stay and chat if they like.

  Note: the facilitator needs to actually facilitate, including cutting off lengthy intros or any discussions that get started during the ‘quick wins’ and ‘quick requests’ rounds. If you have a group over 10 you might need to divide into subgroups for the discussion part.

  I think we had around 3 quick wins, 3 quick requests, and briefly discussed 2 topics in our 45 minute session.

  What links here?

  • Forumite's comment on Please, no more group brainstorming by OllieBase (28 Jul 2025 20:00 UTC; 4 points)

• Jamie_Harris 30 May 2025 7:23 UTC

  11 points

  3 ∶ 0

  on: Pos­i­tive effects of EA on men­tal health

  Good news if true! Thanks for sharing.

  Some other guesses/​hypotheses of things that may contribute to positive mental health:

  • “For people who feel pulled by all the important problems out there”, EA’s focus on tractability, cost-effectiveness, and actually doing things that make a difference, may mean that for some people it’s a much more hopeful, optimistic, solutions-oriented take than what they’re used to. I remember speaking to a Leaf alum (i.e. a teenager) who found Leaf inspiring/​motivating in contrast to the climate change doom and gloom that they were usually surrounded by.

  • There are a bunch of mental health and wellbeing services out there specifically for EAs. Maybe this is just another opportunity to engage with that sort of support that someone might otherwise have skipped or never had access to. (Although my sense is that these services have developed/​spread/​grown since the 2022 survey.)

  • More generally, plausible mental health /​ wellbeing discussion and consideration may be more part of the environment, culture, and social norms than they have had in other contexts. A different topic, but I had a similar thing for productivity when I first became more involved with EA—I was around 21 and had graduated from a top university, but still I’d never really encountered people discussing ways to become more productive and efficient generally. I can imagine a similar thing happening for mental health. (I can also imagine people encounter ‘wellness’ programs in e.g. corporate environments where they are based on vibes rather than evidence, or otherwise clearly seem to be shallow, hollow, or ineffective, and then the more evidence-based approach within EA makes it resonate more. I think something a little bit like this did happen to me.)

  • This is hinted at with “wanting to be impactful”, but all the standard stuff in the 80k career guide about fulfilling careers etc.

  (Here I’m just assuming the premise is true. I do feel a bit sceptical due to the survey response bias thing. But I don’t have counterevidence beyond anecdotes and intuition.)

• Jamie_Harris 5 May 2025 16:41 UTC

  7 points

  2 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Jamie_Harris’s comment on: We don’t have ev­i­dence that the best char­i­ties are over 1000x more cost effec­tive than the average

  (Ironically, I suppose the title—“We don’t have evidence that the best charities are over 1000x more cost effective than the average”—is also an overly confident claim, where a question might have been better, unless the original poster had carried out an exhaustive search for relevant evidence)

• Jamie_Harris 5 May 2025 16:38 UTC

  19 points

  5 ∶ 0

  on: We don’t have ev­i­dence that the best char­i­ties are over 1000x more cost effec­tive than the average

  I agree with other comments that the 80k article is the place to go.

  But I also want to specifically praise and thank the original poster for (1) noticing an important seeming empirical claim being bandied around (2) noticing that the evidence being used seemed insufficient (3) sharing that potentially important discovery.

  (For what it’s worth, before the 80k article, I also worried that people in the EA community were excessively confident in similar claims.)

  Also, even if charities differ significantly on a specific, narrow metric, they may differ less substantially in terms of various indirect and knock on effects (which also matter). See https://​​reducing-suffering.org/​​why-charities-dont-differ-astronomically-in-cost-effectiveness/​​

• Jamie_Harris 4 May 2025 9:06 UTC

  9 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: RyanCarey’s comment on: Up­date: EAIF is now more fund­ing constrained

  I don’t think our capacity has been as stretched as LTFF. We get fewer applications.

  Id guess the median application wait time is around 4 weeks.

  It feels somewhat uninformative to share a mean, because sometimes there are substantial delays due to:

  • applicants themselves being unresponsive to our own emails or saying they need several weeks to send us some follow up info

  • Logistical complexities on some specific applications.

  I haven’t looked these things up though; let me know if you’re keen for a more precise answer.

  As for applicant questions: likewise, I personally don’t get many of these. I answer them when I do, even if sometimes more briefly than I’d like to be able to. I haven’t asked Harri his experience though.

  (I’m intrigued to see these things described as “the value proposition to funding applicants”. I would have seen the value proposition more as like ‘funding for EA infrastructure projects, even for small amounts’, with these other elements more as secondary parts of the ‘experience’. Of course, this still matters though.)

Up­date: EAIF is now more fund­ing constrained

• Jamie_Harris 15 Apr 2025 9:06 UTC

  4 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Erik Jentzen’s comment on: Planned Pilot Pro­ject: Cu­rated Video-Based EA Learn­ing Plat­form

  Sounds exciting!

  It’s really about exploring what kinds of hurdles might come up in this ⁸⁰⁄₂₀ approach — for example, getting a clearer picture of where enough high-quality videos already exist and where important content is still missing. But also more generally: what else might turn out to be more complicated than expected? The other key question is: do people like and actually use the platform?

  Makes sense to me. But this one...

  And ideally, does it help move people from ambition to action — for example, by inspiring them to donate, explore new career paths, or volunteer their time to help solve the problems discussed?

  ...seems very hard to notice/​track in a pilot. (I’d be very interested if you have ideas how to do this!)

  Happy to keep you in the loop on which videos I find or plan to include — I’d really appreciate your thoughts or suggestions at that stage!

  Sounds great, thank you! Feel free to DM me on the EA Forum or email jamie.a.harris94 [at] gmail.com

  And also: if you’ve created any content yourself that might be a good fit, feel free to share!

  I’m afraid it’s a bit too bespoke to the exact narrative/​experience of the course to be worth sharing more widely. (Usually 2-8 minute videos summarising key concepts or insights and explaining them in the context of a subject-specific course for 15-18 year olds, e.g. this one.)

• Jamie_Harris 13 Apr 2025 8:15 UTC

  4 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Planned Pilot Pro­ject: Cu­rated Video-Based EA Learn­ing Plat­form

  Sounds very cool! I think video courses is a great idea, since I expect that a lot of people (myself included) at least sometimes find it a lot easier and more fun to watch videos than to read things.

  Quite intrigued which videos you intend to use; when I’ve created EA-relevant online courses in the past, a dearth of high-quality, relevant videos has been a bottleneck. I ended up creating my own content/​videos. (There are sometimes things like EA Global talks, but they often aren’t sufficiently introductory and broad, e.g. they’ll be about a specific intervention, org, or argument rather than about a cause area or topic.)

  What uncertainties are you testing with the pilot? Is it mainly about demand/​sign ups/​views?