Posts

[Link] "One year of Future Perfect" (Vox) 2019-10-15T18:12:55.663Z · score: 23 (11 votes)
[Link] "Machine Learning Projects for IDA" (Ought) 2019-10-12T17:35:18.638Z · score: 10 (3 votes)
[Link] "State of the Qualia" (QRI) 2019-10-11T21:14:23.412Z · score: 22 (11 votes)
[Link] "How feasible is long-range forecasting?" (Open Phil) 2019-10-11T21:01:53.471Z · score: 28 (9 votes)
Should CEA buy ea.org? 2019-10-04T23:10:52.237Z · score: 5 (5 votes)
[Link] Experience Doesn’t Predict a New Hire’s Success (HBR) 2019-10-04T19:30:49.479Z · score: 9 (3 votes)
Why is the amount of child porn growing? 2019-10-02T01:09:45.207Z · score: 6 (14 votes)
[Link] Moral Interlude from "The Wizard and the Prophet" 2019-09-27T18:42:16.728Z · score: 13 (5 votes)
[Link] The Case for Charter Cities Within the EA Framework (CCI) 2019-09-23T20:08:19.947Z · score: 22 (11 votes)
[Link] "Relaxed Beliefs Under Psychedelics and the Anarchic Brain" (SSC) 2019-09-11T14:45:35.993Z · score: 3 (8 votes)
[Link] Progress Studies (Jasmine Wang) 2019-09-10T19:55:55.891Z · score: 17 (8 votes)
Campaign finance reform as an EA priority? 2019-08-30T01:46:55.222Z · score: 16 (10 votes)
[Link] BERI handing off Jaan Tallinn's grantmaking 2019-08-27T17:13:30.112Z · score: 18 (8 votes)
[Links] Tangible actions to support Hong Kong protestors from afar 2019-08-18T23:47:03.223Z · score: 4 (9 votes)
[Link] Virtue signaling annotated bibliography (Geoffrey Miller) 2019-08-14T22:41:55.592Z · score: 7 (5 votes)
[Link] Bolsonaro is cutting down the rainforest (nytimes) 2019-08-01T00:45:11.495Z · score: 4 (10 votes)
[Link] The Schelling Choice is "Rabbit", not "Stag" (LessWrong post) 2019-07-31T21:27:22.097Z · score: 20 (5 votes)
[Link] "Two Case Studies in Communist Insecurity" (The Scholar's Stage) 2019-07-25T22:17:05.968Z · score: 7 (7 votes)
[Link] Thiel on GCRs 2019-07-22T20:47:13.076Z · score: 26 (10 votes)
Debrief: "cash prizes for the best arguments against psychedelics" 2019-07-14T17:04:20.153Z · score: 47 (24 votes)
[Link] "Revisiting the Insights model" (Median Group) 2019-07-14T14:58:39.661Z · score: 17 (6 votes)
[Link] "Why Responsible AI Development Needs Cooperation on Safety" (OpenAI) 2019-07-12T01:19:39.816Z · score: 20 (9 votes)
[Link] "The AI Timelines Scam" 2019-07-11T03:37:22.568Z · score: 22 (13 votes)
If physics is many-worlds, does ethics matter? 2019-07-10T15:28:49.733Z · score: 14 (9 votes)
What grants has Carl Shulman's discretionary fund made? 2019-07-08T18:40:19.414Z · score: 50 (23 votes)
Do we know how many big asteroids could impact Earth? 2019-07-07T16:06:57.304Z · score: 31 (13 votes)
Leverage Research shutting down? 2019-07-04T20:55:34.890Z · score: 22 (13 votes)
What's the best structure for optimal allocation of EA capital? 2019-06-04T17:00:36.470Z · score: 7 (12 votes)
On the margin, should EA focus on outreach or retention? 2019-05-31T22:22:54.299Z · score: 5 (6 votes)
[Link] Act of Charity 2019-05-30T22:29:41.518Z · score: 4 (4 votes)
Why do you downvote EA Forum posts & comments? 2019-05-29T22:52:06.900Z · score: 6 (6 votes)
[Link] MacKenzie Bezos signs the Giving Pledge 2019-05-28T17:55:30.483Z · score: 13 (8 votes)
[Link] David Pearce on understanding psychedelics 2019-05-19T17:32:49.242Z · score: 6 (11 votes)
Cash prizes for the best arguments against psychedelics being an EA cause area 2019-05-10T18:13:04.968Z · score: 47 (32 votes)
[Link] "Radical Consequence and Heretical Knots" – an ethnography of the London EA community 2019-05-09T17:31:52.354Z · score: 16 (9 votes)
[Link] 5-HTTLPR 2019-05-09T14:56:50.820Z · score: 16 (4 votes)
[Link] 80,000 Hours 2018 annual review 2019-05-08T17:06:06.726Z · score: 23 (9 votes)
[Link] "A Psychedelic Renaissance" (Chronicle of Philanthropy) 2019-05-06T17:57:41.913Z · score: 24 (6 votes)
Why isn't GV psychedelics grantmaking housed under Open Phil? 2019-05-05T17:10:45.959Z · score: 17 (11 votes)
[Link] Totalitarian ethical systems 2019-05-04T18:37:39.166Z · score: 7 (8 votes)
Is preventing child abuse a plausible Cause X? 2019-05-04T00:58:12.568Z · score: 52 (31 votes)
Why does EA use QALYs instead of experience sampling? 2019-04-24T00:58:15.693Z · score: 55 (23 votes)
Should EA collectively leave Facebook? 2019-04-22T18:54:04.317Z · score: 9 (7 votes)
Should EA grantmaking be subject to independent audit? 2019-04-17T17:18:32.303Z · score: 19 (9 votes)
Is Modern Monetary Theory a good idea? 2019-04-16T21:25:30.508Z · score: 15 (9 votes)
What Master's is the best preparation for an Econ PhD? 2019-04-16T21:04:18.295Z · score: 12 (2 votes)
Complex value & situational awareness 2019-04-16T18:42:58.980Z · score: 15 (7 votes)
[Link] Open Phil's 2019 progress & plans update 2019-04-16T17:31:53.811Z · score: 26 (15 votes)
Who in EA enjoys managing people? 2019-04-10T23:49:16.862Z · score: 6 (3 votes)
Who is working on finding "Cause X"? 2019-04-10T23:09:23.892Z · score: 19 (12 votes)

Comments

Comment by milan_griffes on Oddly, Britain has never been happier · 2019-10-22T19:42:24.077Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Some background on the IHME tool here: http://www.healthdata.org/data-visualization/gbd-compare

And I believe you can download all the underlying data & citations from there as well.

Comment by milan_griffes on Oddly, Britain has never been happier · 2019-10-22T15:48:58.259Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Which is actually sorta surprising given the rollout of third-generation antidepressants during that time.

Comment by milan_griffes on Oddly, Britain has never been happier · 2019-10-22T15:47:56.914Z · score: 1 (2 votes) · EA · GW

cf. IHME's data visualization tool, which shows that UK rates of depression have been roughly constant since the 1990s (except for a recent decline in Northern Ireland):

uk-depression-rates

Comment by milan_griffes on The Future of Earning to Give · 2019-10-21T17:09:54.343Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

See also Joey's Cause X Guide & its comments.

Comment by milan_griffes on The Future of Earning to Give · 2019-10-21T17:01:45.882Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · EA · GW
I find that less plausible than the idea that the two best VCs can fund all the startups that need funding. The VC world has better incentives than the EA world, and maybe better feedback. Yet I still see little reason for confidence that the right startups are being funded.

This is a great comparison.

Comment by milan_griffes on The Future of Earning to Give · 2019-10-21T17:00:05.995Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

https://maps.org

Also there are other funding gaps in that space where ETG donors could make a big difference. Shoot me a message if you'd like more info.

Comment by milan_griffes on Problems in effective altruism and what to do about them · 2019-10-19T14:39:30.032Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · EA · GW

Thanks, this is helpful.

Comment by milan_griffes on Problems in effective altruism and what to do about them · 2019-10-19T03:53:10.301Z · score: 16 (7 votes) · EA · GW

Given the post's focus on purported efforts to silence alternative & dissenting views in EA, I think it'd be better for folks here to make comments rather than just downvote.

Comment by milan_griffes on The evolutionary argument against cognitive enhancement research is weak · 2019-10-16T22:00:10.115Z · score: 7 (3 votes) · EA · GW

See also Gwern on this: https://www.gwern.net/Drug-heuristics (a)

Comment by milan_griffes on Why is the EA Hotel having trouble fundraising? · 2019-10-16T18:30:20.521Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · EA · GW

EA Hotel appears to still be having trouble raising funds:


Unfortunately our runway is down to <2 months. Donations made within the next month have particularly high marginal value
Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-12T03:40:15.721Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Totally agree that many data points should go into evaluating political candidates. I haven't taken a close look at your scoring system yet, but I'm glad you're doing that work and think more in that direction would be helpful.

For this thread, I've been holding the frame of "Yang might be a uniquely compelling candidate to longtermist donors (given that most of his policies seem basically okay and he's open to x-risk arguments)."

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T23:13:47.284Z · score: 7 (4 votes) · EA · GW

Yeah, though from my quick look it's not mentioned on her 2016 campaign site: 1, 2

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T22:56:30.811Z · score: 14 (5 votes) · EA · GW

On Yang's site (a):


Advances in automation and Artificial Intelligence (AI) hold the potential to bring about new levels of prosperity humans have never seen. They also hold the potential to disrupt our economies, ruin lives throughout several generations, and, if experts such as Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk are to be believed, destroy humanity.
Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T22:50:58.917Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · EA · GW

If I recall correctly, Weinstein & Yang talk about apocalyptic / dark future stuff a bit during their interview, but not about x-risk specifically.

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T22:36:25.285Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · EA · GW
I'm not hearing any concrete plans for what the president can do

To clarify again, I'm more compelled by Yang's openness to thinking about this sort of thing, rather than proposing any specific plan of action on it. I agree with you that specific action plans from the US executive would probably be premature here.


why that position you quote is compelling to you.

It's compelling because it's plausibly much better than alternatives.

[Edit: it'd be very strange if we end up preferring candidates who hadn't thought about AI at all to candidates who had thought some about AI but don't have specific plans for it.]

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T22:17:42.031Z · score: 2 (3 votes) · EA · GW

Right. Important to clarify that I'm more compelled by Yang's open-mindedness & mood affiliation than the particular plan of calling a lot of partisan attention to AI.

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T22:15:24.725Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Feels relevant to note that Cari & Dustin donated $20M to Hillary & Democratic efforts in late 2016.

Certainly a different situation, though my model is that smaller donations earlier are more leveraged.

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T22:10:46.210Z · score: 8 (5 votes) · EA · GW
There's a slightly different claim which I'm more open to arguments on, which is that if you ran the executive branch you'd be able to make substantial preparations for policy later without making it a big talking point today, even if you don't really know what policy will be needed later.

This is closer to what seems compelling to me.

Not so much "Oh man, Yang is ready to take immediate action on AI alignment!"

More "Huh, Yang is open to thinking about AI alignment being a thing. That seems good + different from other candidates."


I think that someone in office who has a mood affiliation with AI and x-risk and alignment who thinks they 'need to do something' - especially if they promised that to a major funder - would be strongly net negative in most cases.

This could be ameliorated by having the funder not extract any promises, and further by the funder being explicit that they're not interested in immediate action on the issue.

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T21:42:26.967Z · score: 1 (2 votes) · EA · GW

Sure. I think having a presidential candidate using AI alignment as a rallying flag is a good thing (i.e. should at least lead to vetting whether he's doing the former or the latter).

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T21:38:53.896Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · EA · GW
... I think I can see a lot of ways for this to be strongly negative.

Can you expand on this?

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T21:38:24.190Z · score: 13 (5 votes) · EA · GW

Are you saying that advocating for AI alignment would fail at this point?:


Tom Kalil: I’d say, “great, let’s say that I’m prepared to stipulate that, what is that you want me to do?”, then they would look at me and they would say, “Well, you should make this a priority”.
Tom Kalil: I’d say, “What would that look like?” People were not able … they were able to tell you that their issue was important and that they thought the President should devote more time and energy to it, but then when you said “Alright, what is it, literally … let’s say we got the President super interested in this issue, what would they do?” They weren’t able to articulate that part.
Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T21:31:50.441Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · EA · GW

Here's an archived version of Yang's tweet in case the original goes away, is altered, etc.

Comment by milan_griffes on X-risk dollars -> Andrew Yang? · 2019-10-11T21:20:05.166Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · EA · GW

Thanks for this!

I think it's a great hypothesis and deserves careful consideration by EA. (Is any other presidential candidate taking AI alignment seriously? Would any other candidate take a meeting with Bostrom?)

Seems especially compelling when coupled with Scott's recent observation that there's actually not that much money in politics and Carl's observation that systemic change can be done effectively.

Comment by milan_griffes on Defending Philanthropy Against Democracy · 2019-10-07T17:54:49.807Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · EA · GW

Quick examples:

  • Deworming programs are mildly coercive (strong social pressure to take a medicine that foreign NGOs think could be helpful) and normalize the practice of distributing state-approved drugs in schools (which I'd guess is procedurally bad), but we think they're worth it because there's a small chance of a huge object-level benefit.
  • Drug misinformation campaigns (like D.A.R.E.) propagate a bunch of inaccurate information about drugs through public school programs. Advocates think this is worth it because it scares kids away from drugs, but it has the bad procedural effects of degrading epistemics, spreading inaccurate information about human physiology, increasing the extent to which public schools are a venue for propaganda.
Comment by milan_griffes on Defending Philanthropy Against Democracy · 2019-10-07T16:47:31.369Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Yeah, I think the important tension comes out when there's a project that seems very cost-effective on the object level but may have degrading effects on the procedural level (and those effects are hard to roll into a cost-effect model).

Comment by milan_griffes on Defending Philanthropy Against Democracy · 2019-10-07T15:00:21.989Z · score: 6 (3 votes) · EA · GW
Insofar as liberalism is a standard starting assumption for our discourse, I think philanthropy critics have failed to argue why philanthropic decisions deserve greater scrutiny than other private decisions of similar magnitude, such as how much money to spend on various personal goods.

Personal spending has a natural cap that philanthropic spending doesn't have.

Larry Ellison can spend $200 million on a giant yacht – I think that's approaching the limit of what an individual can spend on themselves while still getting utility from their purchases.

But there's no limit to how much someone can spend philanthropically (i.e. no diminishing utility from philanthropic spending). It'd be absurd to buy multiple yachts, but it wouldn't be absurd to double your donations, even if you're already donating a lot. (And from signaling effects, you probably get more personal utility from donating rather than buying a second yacht.)

Because its utility isn't limited, philanthropic spending has the potential to have a much greater impact on society than personal spending. Potential for greater impact implies greater scrutiny.

Comment by milan_griffes on Defending Philanthropy Against Democracy · 2019-10-07T14:49:01.645Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW
The empirical question is well worth debating, but in my view it is both less interesting and less central to existing discussions than the procedural question.

Most of the SSC post is arguing that philanthropy is substantively good (sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11). You're essentially expanding the SSC pro-big-philanthropy view to also argue that big philanthropy is also procedurally good, right?

Curious why you find the substantive-value question less interesting.

(The tension I feel here comes from the case where big philanthropy has been performing well substantively but has weird procedural implications, or vice versa.)

Comment by milan_griffes on [link] Andreas Mogensen's "Maximal Cluelessness" · 2019-10-07T04:27:08.621Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · EA · GW

Indefinite accumulation of resources probably also increases the chance of being targeted by resource-seeking groups with military & political power.

Comment by milan_griffes on [Link] Experience Doesn’t Predict a New Hire’s Success (HBR) · 2019-10-04T23:13:59.660Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Oh interesting. That does look cool, though it's 20 years old.

Seems like they found a different result than Iddekinge et al. 2019 re: job experience – 0.18 rather than no correlation.

My intuition is that there is some effect from learning how to work a desk job, so I'm inclined to side with Schmidt & Hunter.

Comment by milan_griffes on Why did MyGiving need to be replaced? And why is the EffectiveAltruism.org replacement so bad? · 2019-10-04T21:15:40.623Z · score: 5 (6 votes) · EA · GW

It's probably true for most organization failures? (See also Moral Mazes.)

It at least seems like "the incentives weren't good" should be the starting point for most analysis like this. (And for cases where it shouldn't be the starting point, there should be a clear story about why the case is exceptional.)

Comment by milan_griffes on Why did MyGiving need to be replaced? And why is the EffectiveAltruism.org replacement so bad? · 2019-10-04T20:09:31.168Z · score: 0 (16 votes) · EA · GW

Naïve homo economicus answer is that the people who designed & carried out the change weren't incentivized to make it good.

Comment by milan_griffes on How to improve your productivity: a systematic approach to sustainably increasing work output · 2019-10-04T20:02:36.836Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · EA · GW

Things that have increased my productivity:

  • Concentration & awareness practices
  • Mind/body stuff: improving diet, intermittent fasting, intense exercise 2-4 times a week, getting enough sleep (which for me is between 7 and 9 hours each night; see also Gwern on sleep)
  • Figuring out how to use caffeine and other supplements
  • Resolving emotional blocks
  • Getting clearer about the motivations that lead me to spend time on each specific thing I do (somewhat related)
  • Increased feeling of being safe & emotionally supported by many different people
  • Tooling my computer to make it more of a servant, less of a master
  • Anki (in this direction, Tools for thought seems generally promising)
Comment by milan_griffes on Long-Term Future Fund: August 2019 grant recommendations · 2019-10-03T21:56:14.965Z · score: 17 (8 votes) · EA · GW

Thanks for this substantive post!

Re: CFAR, from the April 2019 grant decisions thread:

I expect to communicate extensively with CFAR over the coming weeks, talk to most of its staff members, generally get a better sense of how CFAR operates and think about the big-picture effects that CFAR has on the long-term future and global catastrophic risk. I think I am likely to then either:
-make recommendations for a set of changes with conditional funding,
-decide that CFAR does not require further funding from the LTF,
-or be convinced that CFAR's current plans make sense and that they should have sufficient resources to execute those plans.

Sounds like the third option is what happened?

Comment by milan_griffes on Why is the amount of child porn growing? · 2019-10-03T18:23:27.389Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW
NCMEC says that reports of child porn are growing, but that could easily be reports per posting, postings per image, or images per activity. NCMEC just *counts* reports, which are either a member of the public clicking a "report" button or an algorithm finding suspicious content. They acknowledge that a significant part of the rise in from broader deployment of such algorithms.

Good point. I wonder:

  • Did algorithm deployment expand a lot from 2014 to 2018? (I'm particularly boggled by the 18x increase in reports between 2014 and 2018)
  • What amount of the increase seems reasonable to explain away by changes in reporting methods?
    • About half? (i.e. remaining 2014-to-2018 increase to be explained is 9x?)
    • 75%? (i.e. remaining 2014-to-2018 increase to be explained is 4x?)
Comment by milan_griffes on Why is the amount of child porn growing? · 2019-10-02T22:12:53.035Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · EA · GW

Facebook did roll out opt-in end-to-end encryption for Messenger in late 2016, which is a possible inflection for this.

Comment by milan_griffes on Why is the amount of child porn growing? · 2019-10-02T22:10:24.191Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Yeah, maybe. Messenger's user base doubled over that timeframe, though was already at 600 million users in early 2015.

Comment by milan_griffes on Cause X Guide · 2019-10-02T20:11:46.550Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Subcategory: figuring out why child porn is increasing superlinearly

Comment by milan_griffes on Why is the amount of child porn growing? · 2019-10-02T20:09:39.760Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

I don't think this explains the 18x increase between 2014 and 2018. Communication technology didn't change much in that timeframe, and it'd be surprising if child porn communities substantially lagged behind the mainstream in terms of their tech (there are heavy incentives for them to stay up-to-date).

Comment by milan_griffes on Why is the amount of child porn growing? · 2019-10-02T16:00:20.565Z · score: 14 (5 votes) · EA · GW

I don't think the amount of porn overall increased 18x from 2014 to 2018.

Hard to find a perfect statistic for this... PornHub reported 18.4 billion visits (a, SFW) in 2014 and 33.5 billion visits (a, SFW) in 2018.

So a ~2x increase in visits from 2014 to 2018.

Comment by milan_griffes on Why is the amount of child porn growing? · 2019-10-02T01:11:08.200Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · EA · GW

Also most (!) of this stuff circulates through FB Messenger, so plans to encrypt Messenger end-to-end have a dark implication. From the Times piece:


And when tech companies cooperate fully, encryption and anonymization can create digital hiding places for perpetrators. Facebook announced in March plans to encrypt Messenger, which last year was responsible for nearly 12 million of the 18.4 million worldwide reports of child sexual abuse material, according to people familiar with the reports.
Comment by milan_griffes on [Link] Moral Interlude from "The Wizard and the Prophet" · 2019-09-28T14:51:29.719Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

Could you give a couple example metaphors to help build my intuition here?

Comment by milan_griffes on [Link] Moral Interlude from "The Wizard and the Prophet" · 2019-09-28T01:36:55.051Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · EA · GW

I think the broader point is still important though.

It is weird that discount rates imply that a civilization hundreds of years in the future that's not growing won't be worth much in present decision-making (even if that civilization is very large).

Comment by milan_griffes on Psychology and Climate Change: An Overview · 2019-09-27T21:56:03.908Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

See also Lyons & Carhart-Harris 2018 (archive).

Comment by milan_griffes on [Link] Moral Interlude from "The Wizard and the Prophet" · 2019-09-27T21:41:51.035Z · score: 6 (3 votes) · EA · GW

Huh yeah, weird. Here's the source (Chichilnisky 1996), quote is on p. 5

Strangely they don't actually lay out the "simple computation."

I thought maybe they were getting down to a few hundred thousand by not factoring in a growth rate, but that still leaves you at a little over $3 billion.

So I'm not sure what's going on. Maybe Chichilnisky 1996 started with a much lower global GDP estimate? It was done 23 years ago.

Comment by milan_griffes on [Link] Moral Interlude from "The Wizard and the Prophet" · 2019-09-27T19:59:16.860Z · score: 6 (4 votes) · EA · GW

Just saw Robin Hanson's post (a) on this, also.

Comment by milan_griffes on Some personal thoughts on EA and systemic change · 2019-09-27T18:47:39.096Z · score: 10 (5 votes) · EA · GW

Recent SSC post on political spending (archive) feels relevant.

Comment by milan_griffes on [link] Andreas Mogensen's "Maximal Cluelessness" · 2019-09-25T19:50:30.213Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · EA · GW

Thanks, looking forward to reading this. Here's an archived version.

Cluelessness deserves more attention in EA, especially from the longtermist contingent.

Comment by milan_griffes on [Link] "Relaxed Beliefs Under Psychedelics and the Anarchic Brain" (SSC) · 2019-09-11T14:46:34.240Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · EA · GW

See also Enthea's post (a) on the paper.

Comment by milan_griffes on What to know before talking with journalists about EA · 2019-09-10T20:13:20.559Z · score: 4 (3 votes) · EA · GW

+1 to "The Media Training Bible" being good.

Comment by milan_griffes on What should Founders Pledge research? · 2019-09-10T18:41:18.567Z · score: 16 (7 votes) · EA · GW

+1 to doing something with Sci-Hub.

Sci-Hub has had a huge positive impact. Finding ways to support it / make it more legal / defend it from rent-seeking academic publishers would be great.