Kelly_Witwicki

Karma: 328

Kelly_Witwicki 16 Dec 2017 1:33 UTC
8 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: kierangreig🔸’s comment on: Sentience Institute 2017 Accomplishments, 2018 Plans, and Room for Funding
Thank you Kieran! I will look into global numbers for farmed bait fish and fish mortality, and either update the sheet on that or qualify it with info about this if I cannot find/make estimates. Will update our US estimates too, and also qualify about these numbers being vertebrates. :)

Sentience Institute 2017 Accomplishments, 2018 Plans, and Room for Funding

Kelly_Witwicki14 Dec 2017 20:57 UTC

16 points

3 comments9 min readEA link

Kelly_Witwicki 1 Nov 2017 0:54 UTC
7 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: xccf’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
Since I’m already working on inclusionary practices myself, there’s not much else to do but private or public discussion.

The private discussions I have had explicitly around the issue have varied a lot in their content and purpose and can be characterized as any of the following or a combination thereof: Listening to people’s experiences; sharing my own; discussing solutions; actively (beyond just listening) supporting people who were treated poorly; sharing information and concern about the issue with people in a better or still good position to do something about it; trying to discuss why this or more specific issues of exclusion are a problem with people who prefer the status quo; or endeavoring to show people why something they did was a problem and what they should do differently.

Dealing with a bewilderingly amateur situation myself and working to privately help the people responsible to understand the problem and improve took a month out of my life, and with a really important counterfactual, and that’s strictly in time spent on the issue that I don’t think I would have had to lose in e.g. the animal advocacy community, and not accounting for the emotional toll. I have good reason for (cautious) optimism that that was fruitful but also a red flag restraining that optimism and regardless only time will tell.

Basically I’ve spent a huge amount of time on those private and often solution-oriented conversations and have been hanging over the precipice of burnout with the community since day 1 several years ago. (The broader community at least, not the animal advocacy sub/intersected-community. And disclaimer that there are great individuals throughout the broader community who are my friends and/or whose presence in the community I am so happy for, etc.) And I’m definitely not alone in that.

I can do more to have private conversations with people in better positions than myself to make change here (such as people who are looked up to in the community by the people whose behavior could be more inclusionary, or donors to EA orgs), and I might if this post and the discussion here doesn’t inspire other people to take more action on this issue, which is my hope.

Kelly_Witwicki 1 Nov 2017 0:09 UTC
6 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Michael_Wiebe’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
I think we score quite a bit worse on “feeling” than most altruistically-driven communities and individuals, men included.

[Edit: Point being, yes we’re lacking in feeling, but “thinking vs. feeling” is not a tradeoff we have to make to increase our A (or our gender parity, which isn’t an inherent problem but is tightly related to our problems). EA’s whole purpose is to combine both and we should aim to recruit people who score high on both, not just one or the other. Sorry for the excessive edits.]

Kelly_Witwicki 30 Oct 2017 19:29 UTC
6 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: ateabug’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
Risk does come with greater publicity of such behavior, but that’s part of the point of making it more public (in addition to the information value for people who want to avoid or address it). This is the first I’ve ever publicly said something about these issues in EA, after three years of many private conversations that seem to have resulted in limited or no impact. Greater publicity means greater accountability and motivation for action, both for the people who behave poorly and the people who let them do so without consequence.

Kelly_Witwicki 29 Oct 2017 18:46 UTC
8 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: the_jaded_one’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
Regarding your “red flags”:

1) The post does not advocate for identity categories over competence, but competence over identity categories. As I’ve argued, we’re missing out on a lot of people because they don’t match irrelevant criteria.

2) No skepticism of questionable claims has been suspended. You are welcome, as others have, to point out what claims are too confident and why. You’ll note that I’ve edited the post to qualify a claim I made that a commenter pointed out is debated in the literature, and an implication I made that a commenter convinced me I made too confidently.

You are also welcome to provide arguments for the position you seem to take that the status quo (or an even more exclusive community, which we may be becoming) is better than a more inclusive community. Bringing up the risk is a valuable contribution to this discussion and I really appreciate it. Let’s go further with our analysis of tradeoffs and discuss specific steps we can take to become more inclusive while limiting the risks in either direction, and let’s have a healthy skepticism of the status quo.

3) A dismissal of the whole project of inclusion because of the risk that it will go too far is itself something of a silencing of dissenting opinions and an abandoning of free speech. As I said very explicitly in my comment about free speech, the term is often used to justify speech that pushes people out and reduces the diversity of opinions in the community and the freedom that people have to speak. The question is where the line is—and it’s probably a blurry, messy one—and how we should address transgressions of it to keep our debates as free and productive as possible.

Kelly_Witwicki 29 Oct 2017 18:33 UTC
8 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: the_jaded_one’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
I already commented this on your earlier, similar comment, but since you’re repeating this here I will too so it’s not missed:

I entirely appreciate the concern of going too far. Let’s just be careful not to assume that risks only come with action—the opposite path is an awful one too, and with inaction we risk moving further down it.

Kelly_Witwicki 29 Oct 2017 16:55 UTC
9 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: the_jaded_one’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
I entirely appreciate the concern of going too far. Let’s just be careful not to assume that risks only come with action—the opposite path is an awful one too, and with inaction we risk moving further down it.

Kelly_Witwicki 29 Oct 2017 14:58 UTC
5 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: kbog’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
Animal advocates definitely discuss inclusion in their movement(s) more, or at least more productively. A small organization was even established in the space recently to increase racial inclusion in the movement. EA discussion on the issue has led to far less action and results in a lot more pushback and hostility. If EAs do discuss it more, I’d say the excess is in people expressing frustration and that not going anywhere.

(My source is observation—I have been heavily involved in both communities for several years.)

In terms of wider society, it’s an issue that people and institutions from governments to non-profits that exist to solve the issue to tech companies are putting a lot of discussion and action into. BLM isn’t something separate, it’s part of the discussion in wider society. And IIRC US companies spend $8bn on diversity programs annually. (How effectively they’re spending it is another matter, but the point is it’s getting a lot of attention.)

Kelly_Witwicki 29 Oct 2017 3:50 UTC
11 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Kelly_Witwicki’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
The same person, in response to the point “Don’t dismiss or trivialize the altruistic concerns ordinary people have,” said:

Agree – this is one of the most alienating parts of EA groups I have come across. Charity snobbishness has become quite extreme in some contexts I’ve been in, and I found it to be a somewhat closed-minded approach to altruism generally. At one point, I became persuaded by this attitude and even noticed myself becoming judgmental with the people around me. It was only when my mum told me she thought I had become more judgmental, and not for the better, that I took initiative to really analyse why I was behaving like I was, and to understand that this is not a way to do the most good for people around you nor for trying to encourage people to give their time and money more effectively. I think many people in EA should take a step back and realise that in their attempt to do the most good, they are acting in a closed-minded way, which is actually preventing them to be able to achieve the most good they can.

Kelly_Witwicki 29 Oct 2017 3:40 UTC
17 points
0 ∶ 0
on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
Someone who prefers to remain anonymous shared with me that there were multiple issues that made her and other women interns feel excluded at an EA organization, but she felt it was too intimidating to bring them up because the staff seemed too tight, including the women, and the interns felt too separate from them.

Kelly_Witwicki 29 Oct 2017 3:02 UTC
10 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: xccf’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
I like this idea. It will be skewed towards people who aren’t turned off by the culture, as those who are will have less interest in, and in some or many cases may not even be exposed to, the survey, but getting more systematic info on people’s feelings here would be very useful.

Kelly_Witwicki 27 Oct 2017 22:07 UTC
2 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: ClaireZabel’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
Thanks, clarified.

Kelly_Witwicki 27 Oct 2017 21:45 UTC
9 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Julia_Wise🔸’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
Julia,

I appreciate the work you’ve done and continue to do on community-building. It seems though that there is a lot more productive work that can done than can be achieved by one part-time role, and that there are angles we’re not addressing.

For instance, we could bring in someone who can advise on all forms of communication from job postings to website UX to social media content and strategy; assist with speaker recruitment and selection and provide feedback for presentations at conferences; and conduct reviews of inclusionary performance in organizations’ hiring and management practices, in outreach efforts, and in local communities’ practices.

Kelly_Witwicki 27 Oct 2017 21:01 UTC
7 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: xccf’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
An explanation of what you mean by “turn out OK” would be helpful. For instance, do movements that err more towards social justice fare worse than those that err away from it (or than those that sit at the status quo)?

Whether that’s the case for the atheism movement or the open source community is a heavy question that merits more explanation.

Actually, I would think that any overshooting you see in these communities is a reaction to how status-quo (or worse) both of those communities are. Note for instance that when women are not collaborators on a project (but not when they are), their open-source contributions are more likely to be accepted than men’s when their gender is not known but despite that they’re less likely to be accepted than men’s when their gender is known.

Kelly_Witwicki 27 Oct 2017 13:24 UTC

7 points

0 ∶ 0

Error

The value
  NIL
is not of type
  SIMPLE-STRING
when binding #:USER-ID163

Kelly_Witwicki 27 Oct 2017 13:23 UTC
10 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Chris Leong’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
I think that’s a huge part of the reason why we overrepresent people the demographics we do. But offloading responsibility onto part of the pipeline below us isn’t sufficient, least of all when we can source from other pipelines.

Kelly_Witwicki 27 Oct 2017 13:22 UTC
12 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: xccf’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
The problem is that those thoughts, as I noted, become actions, just actions we can usually only see as systematic trends. Just because someone does not say “women are incompetent” does not mean they aren’t underestimating women’s competence and e.g. hiring them less than he should. Taking action on this just requires a more systematic approach than explicit discrimination does.

I agree that in terms of what works, just pointing out bias doesn’t seem to help and can even backfire, as I mentioned, which is why I provided a list of other possible solutions.

Kelly_Witwicki 27 Oct 2017 12:57 UTC
3 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: xccf’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
I can’t address all of this but will say three quick things:

I’m broadly skeptical of the social psychology research you cite

I appreciate it’s weakness, but it’s at least some evidence against people’s intuitions and in addition to the literature on how those intuitions are demonstrably false and discriminatory it should update people away from those discriminatory beliefs.

[Edit: I appreciate that I should generally behave as though my community will behave well, and as such I should not have requested that people upvote even if I just asked them to “upvote if [they] find the post useful.” I want to be sure to flag in this response though the incredibly poor way in which people who disagree with claims and arguments in favor of diversity and inclusion are using their votes, in comments and on the whole post. It’s worth explicitly observing that identity-driven voting here is not equal among opposers and supporters, but seems clearly dominated by opposers.]

I appreciate your suggestions a lot, but caution you to be careful of your own assumptions. For instance, I never suggested that a Diversity & Inclusion Officer should be the person most passionate about the role instead of most smart about it.

To emphasize though, so it doesn’t get lost behind those critical thoughts: I thoroughly appreciate the suggestions you’ve contributed here.

[Edit: Apologies for some excessive editing. I readily acknowledge that in an already a hostile environment, my initial reaction to criticism regarding an important issue that is causing a lot of harm is too defensive.]

Kelly_Witwicki 27 Oct 2017 1:17 UTC
10 points
0 ∶ 0
in reply to: Kelsey Piper’s comment on: Why & How to Make Progress on Diversity & Inclusion in EA
While I thoroughly appreciate your thoughts here and I’m glad you voiced them, I think you started on a miscommunication:

I don’t think the fact that there are costs to this, as anything, is controversial (though I know its cost-effectiveness is), and it sounds to me like Tyler just meant “intrinsic benefits,” in addition to the instrumental benefits to EA community-building. If he thought improving diversity and inclusion in the community had no cost, I would think he’d say its case is irrefutable, not that these benefits merely “strengthen” its case.

Kelly_Witwicki

Sen­tience In­sti­tute 2017 Ac­com­plish­ments, 2018 Plans, and Room for Funding

Error

Sentience Institute 2017 Accomplishments, 2018 Plans, and Room for Funding