Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 19 Jul 2026 17:51 UTC

  5 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: How does one plan for death as an effec­tive al­tru­ist?

  Hey zenc!

  https://​​forum.effectivealtruism.org/​​posts/​​yfpGTWTry9e5pDX4y/​​have-you-written-a-will-involving-a-bequest-to-charity-do

  Includes:

  • a past initiative from Joey Savoie a decade ago before he founded Ambitious Impact (now defunct)

  • A GenerationPledge website for ultra high net worth inheritors (now just some Google Slides, but seems updated as of 2026!)

  • UK-specific resources from Giving What We Can

  • Survey-style questions from the OP in the comments.

  Another guide from 2014 with several defunct links here.

  State of the art today (for now): most Effective Giving Organisations have a “Bequests /​ Last Wills” webpage. To my knowledge there is no “effective giving online will generator” platform (yet).

  Current people I’m aware of that are doing this at or above ~0.1 FTE is Anne Schulze (Effektiv Spenden co founder), Fianna Nieuwenstein (Senior Comms professional at Doneer Effectief).

  There are other players who have WIP products but I’m unclear to the extent I can disclose here. I am personally extremely interested in this question and overall subject. We should DM

In­spiring col­leagues in Lux­em­bourg on Effec­tive Giv­ing + iden­ti­fy­ing in­fras­truc­tural gaps

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 13 May 2026 23:09 UTC

  4 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Org-Builders: If Noth­ing Off The Shelf Works, Con­sider Just Build­ing It.

  Ops culture isn’t yet a building culture—the default mindset is “keep the trains running” rather than “ship something”.

  real

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 3 May 2026 13:27 UTC

  1 point

  1 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Manuel Allgaier’s comment on: Fore­cast­ing is Way Over­rated, and We Should Stop Fund­ing It

  Should forecasting receive more or less EA funding?

  It’s not a good use of marginal funding when even one of the best forecasters can’t build a strong view around its impact.

  You can say “confidential AI use cases make it valuable”. I don’t disagree. I disagree that $100M went into this. Why shouldn’t it be $10M?

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 1 Mar 2026 4:10 UTC

  9 points

  6 ∶ 0

  in reply to: David Mathers🔸’s comment on: Pete Hegseth de­clares An­thropic a sup­ply-chain risk

  I’m glad as a movement we are able to appreciate this nuance too David. By no means does Anthropic get a free pass, especially since mass foreign surveillance wasnt part of their two non-negociables, as someone who is foreign to the US.

  Still want to acknowledge the bold action they took in the face of an autocratic regime

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 28 Feb 2026 1:14 UTC

  82 points

  26 ∶ 6

  on: Pete Hegseth de­clares An­thropic a sup­ply-chain risk

  I’ve never been more proud to be part of the Effective Altruism movement

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 27 Feb 2026 16:29 UTC

  4 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Jeff Kaufman 🔸’s comment on: Here’s to the Polypropy­lene Makers

  Knew it was a bit too good to be true 🥲 Meltblown PP rolls and facepiece moulds seem like the key upstream bottlenecks to N95 /​ reusable respirator production.

  More reason to advocate for pre-securing offshore oil rig-style labour contracts + government compliance (NIOSH) for surging PPE production.

  Intuitively, advocating for private companies to maximise production and removing the friction to do so feels more tractable than advocating federal governments to stockpile +5 billion additional N95s. Ideally we should still pursue both

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 27 Feb 2026 15:44 UTC

  6 points

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Here’s to the Polypropy­lene Makers

  500M in N95 mask materials in 28 days from just 2 plants is a really massive number, that’s 17M per day!

  Quick BOTEC: 50M essential workers in the US demand 10M N95 masks per day, assuming the best N95 masks on the market today have a 5-day lifecycle. Even if they demanded 50M day, if we increased the number of plants from 2 to 10 (assuming the next 8 have 50% the max capacity of the Braskem plants), this might potentially solve the meltblown bottleneck.

  Updates me toward thinking meltblown polypropylene may be more capable of surge than I previously assumed.

  If similar labour pre-commitments and coordination mechanisms could be secured across other PPE stages before the next pandemic, this could potentially shift the surge vs stockpile ratio more towards surge.

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 16 Feb 2026 7:48 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  on: An­nounc­ing the new Direc­tor of EA UK

  Welcome to the UK Gergo! 😊

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 12 Feb 2026 0:40 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Don’t just have a job role. Have a move­ment role.

  As someone not in a full-time impact job, I find thinking about Movement Roles is doubly important! By de-coupling from the job market, this is a powerful framing to be more agentic. Strong upvoted this post

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 6 Feb 2026 11:39 UTC

  3 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Kristof Redei’s comment on: An­swer Eng­ine Op­ti­mi­sa­tion: What do LLMs be­lieve about im­pact?

  Deeply appreciate this Kristof. Interesting that at a broad level (what are the best charities, how to help more people), it cites credible and evidence-based resources.

  Then when discussing animals and Africa—i.e. more long-tail keywords—it does not.

  There is probably low-hanging opportunity here for charities to write up more indexable FAQs and blogposts that match the language a user would use when asking an LLM a question (or even Google).

An­swer Eng­ine Op­ti­mi­sa­tion: What do LLMs be­lieve about im­pact?

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 13 Jan 2026 21:41 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Joel Tan🔸’s comment on: Deep Re­port on Effec­tive Giv­ing in Asia

  Helpful indeed, and thanks for the spreadsheet!

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 11 Jan 2026 23:43 UTC

  1 point

  0 ∶ 0

  on: Deep Re­port on Effec­tive Giv­ing in Asia

  Hey Joel, thanks for the writeup, super insightful!

  “the monetary value of an average GWWC pledge as 146 DALYs averted per pledge (equivalent to USD 20,000 in GiveWell donations)”

  Is that $20K USD comparable to GWWC’s headline figure of $100K USD per 10% pledge, or some other headline metric?

  I note two interesting datapoints versus GWWC’s figures:

  1. 16 year lifespan vs GWWC’s 35.1 ← Less than half of GWWC’s lifespan?

  2. 35% counterfactuality adjustment versus GWWC’s 33% ← Only +2% uplift versus the Western context?

  Not sure how the above parses with this paragraph: “On the positive side, Asian pledgers are counterfactually less likely to do effective giving, and give for a greater number of years.”

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 9 Jan 2026 17:47 UTC

  1 point

  1 ∶ 0

  on: Great bit of mes­sag­ing from The Life You Can Save

  I liked this line most: “It makes them a problem-solver, rather than putting them on the defensive.”

  In my experience advocating effective giving as a layperson, I find that inviting people to have more agency has generally led to my best engagement (and pledges!)

EA Lon­don: Quar­terly Strat­egy Sprint (Q4′26)

EA Lon­don: Quar­terly Strat­egy Sprint (Q3′26)

EA Lon­don: Quar­terly Strat­egy Sprint (Q2′26)

EA Lon­don: Quar­terly Strat­egy Sprint (Q1′26)

• Lorenzo Fong Ponce 🔸 27 Dec 2025 18:01 UTC

  3 points

  0 ∶ 0

  in reply to: Lorenzo Buonanno🔸’s comment on: Is Silent Par­ti­ci­pa­tion Eth­i­cally Suffi­cient?

  I think all comments here are accurate.

  • $100K is the headline figure

  • $15K is the attribution to GWWC (would be much harder for someone to pledge without all the digital infrastructure, research, community etc)

  • $47K is what you’d discount from $100K if you believe cost-effectiveness of the best charities decrease over time as the problem becomes more “solved”, and if a pledger is giving a % of their donation below the GiveWell bar

  If I take 10% of the median London annual salary (£4.75K) then assume they work 30 more years (£143K), this roughly in line with GWWC’s headline figure.

  At 1%, if we assume annual inflation = annual salary increases = annual negative discounts on cost-effectiveness of top charities we still get ~£14K LTV of a 1% pledge. Maybe apply -£4K discounts on pledge dropouts or changes in life circumstance to £10K.

  How you wish to apply % attribution to GWWC’s infrastructure /​ paid ads /​ in-person advocacy /​ the local EA meetup /​ online forums is probably a messier science and hotly debated. Good thing OP and I aren’t doing this outside a personal capacity.

  That said I’d bet that OP’s co-workers and mine have much limited exposure to EA, so the counterfactual upside of personal advocacy is much higher, no matter if you take from the $10K headline or $4.7K time-discounted high-impact donation per 1% pledge.

  At the end of the day £10K will still go to high-impact nonprofits, and it would have been a community effort :)