Other than using “democratic” as a buzzword, what exactly is the problem here?
We live in a world where the vast majority of people doesn’t care about charity being effective. So the most democratic way of doing effective altruism would be… to stop doing it.
Or did you mean something else by “democratic”?
It has been the most emotionally draining paper we have ever written.
That alone is no evidence of the quality of the argument. (Women’s tears shouldn’t automatically win at the marketplace of ideas.)
Looking at the quote, I like the parts about the whistle-blower protection and “stop classifying everything as info hazards”, but I am not sure how to reduce “each orgs’ reliance on EA funding and tech billionaire funding” (the only way to reduce your dependence on some sources of funding is to find other sources of funding, do you have a specific proposal in mind?), and the part about “actively fund critical work” is suspiciously self-serving.
More importantly, the quoted part doesn’t feel like “concrete reforms” (maybe it makes much more sense in proper context), but more like a list of buzzwords.
Most EAs are from USA, UK, and Germany? Well, those sound like big and rich democratic countries. (By the way, I find it weird that you used similar colors to put USA and UK together, when the numbers show that the difference between USA and UK is much bigger than between UK and Germany.)
Can you be more explicit about what is missing there? You probably didn’t expect many EAs to come from Monaco. So is this about China? Yeah, it would make sense to discuss this problem separately. Maybe it is about a language barrier, and someone should write a convincing letter or a book about effective altruism in Chinese, maybe using some quotes from Confucius. Seems like a potentially high-value move. (There is a risk that the Chinese government might disapprove of it. But it is worth trying.)
I suspect that Americans in general give more money to charity (per capita) compared to other nations. If that is true (I am not sure) then it wouldn’t be so surprising that they dominate in the effective altruism.
Popular users accumulate more power, which they can use to further amplify allies, bury dissent, and shape what others see, or don’t see.
Other than using “democratic” as a buzzword, what exactly is the problem here?
We live in a world where the vast majority of people doesn’t care about charity being effective. So the most democratic way of doing effective altruism would be… to stop doing it.
Or did you mean something else by “democratic”?
That alone is no evidence of the quality of the argument. (Women’s tears shouldn’t automatically win at the marketplace of ideas.)
Looking at the quote, I like the parts about the whistle-blower protection and “stop classifying everything as info hazards”, but I am not sure how to reduce “each orgs’ reliance on EA funding and tech billionaire funding” (the only way to reduce your dependence on some sources of funding is to find other sources of funding, do you have a specific proposal in mind?), and the part about “actively fund critical work” is suspiciously self-serving.
More importantly, the quoted part doesn’t feel like “concrete reforms” (maybe it makes much more sense in proper context), but more like a list of buzzwords.
Most EAs are from USA, UK, and Germany? Well, those sound like big and rich democratic countries. (By the way, I find it weird that you used similar colors to put USA and UK together, when the numbers show that the difference between USA and UK is much bigger than between UK and Germany.)
Can you be more explicit about what is missing there? You probably didn’t expect many EAs to come from Monaco. So is this about China? Yeah, it would make sense to discuss this problem separately. Maybe it is about a language barrier, and someone should write a convincing letter or a book about effective altruism in Chinese, maybe using some quotes from Confucius. Seems like a potentially high-value move. (There is a risk that the Chinese government might disapprove of it. But it is worth trying.)
I suspect that Americans in general give more money to charity (per capita) compared to other nations. If that is true (I am not sure) then it wouldn’t be so surprising that they dominate in the effective altruism.
And yet the criticism is often highly upvoted.