Co-director at EA France, PA on the side
Louise Verkin
Karma: 158
Do you think people might simply not have seen your poll? (and don’t understand that by “my suggestion” you’re referring to an actual poll). We’re replying to what is currently the top comment, that might give our comments more visibility.
I’ll signal-boost your poll in my comment above—even if to be clear I disagree with both the poster’s and your suggestions.
Edit: can’t find the actual comment in which you have this particular poll, if you share the link with me I’m happy to add it to comment above
Would it leave most of the benefit? If men (the gender who, at this point in time, initiates the most) stop initiating, I imagine a number of good relationships will not be born at all.
Thank you for sharing this!
A small suggestion for readibility: can you make sure to spell out acronyms the first time you use them? It took me a bit of time to realise that “OOM” was “order of magnitude”, before realising that it was spelt out but two lines below (I’d previously seen it used for “out of memory” and in the context of object-oriented programming).
Seconding Ollie’s comment, thank you! I’ve shared this post with our local organisers.
EA France plans to launch a translation project soon to have key EA web content translated by a professional. If you’re a French speaker who wants to do translation work, please get in touch so we can make sure we’re not duplicating work.
I will also create a public database of what we’re planning to translate and how much progress we’ve made. Anyone who wants to translate or has translated EA content into French is welcome to add their own articles there! The link will be shared on the EA Groups Slack (channel #french-speaking-groups), I’m also happy to share it by DM with anyone who requests it.
Thank you Anna for writing this! EA France is considering translating EA books and a write-up like yours is tremendously useful.
FYI, your first link (“misleading editorial about longtermism”) directs me back to this post instead of to the editorial.
You’re reading more into my comment than I intended. I don’t disagree with you—I was just correcting what I believed to be a wrong deduction. If we try to create new norms, it’s good to make sure that we have accurate trade-offs in mind.