EA Forum Podcast (All audio)

This document provides an overview of research on the efficacy of aquatic animal stunning, a widely supported intervention among aquatic animal welfare advocates to reduce pain during slaughter. It offers a brief introduction to electrical stunning, the methods used to assess consciousness, and academic perspectives on its effectiveness. The information presented may raise some doubts about the reliability of current stunning machines. While I still believe promoting stunning equipment is a strong approach overall, I think more research is needed, and we should reassess our views on the efficacy of interventions focused on aquatic animal stunning.

Key take-aways:

•  Actual field studies investigating the efficacy of stunning equipment are scarce. Reliable laboratory studies testing stunning equipment are more common, but it is unclear how well these results translate to practical field usage.
• Behavioral indicators, such as the Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex (VOR), which can be manually observed, appear to be unreliable [...]

---

Outline:

(00:42) Key take-aways:

(02:23) Background

(02:44) Current Practices in Aquatic Animal Slaughter

(04:15) Stunning systems

(05:20) Assessing consciousness

(08:31) Efficacy of stunning

(09:06) Literature scan

(12:08) Expert interviews

(12:49) Expert A

(16:33) Expert C

(17:22) Expert D

(18:05) Summary of expert interviews

(19:04) Issues in current stunning machines

(21:21) Conclusion

The original text contained 6 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

October 24th, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/eYxLAenSdKzg4PBxH/challenges-in-aquatic-animal-stunning

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

This is a link post.

Lafiya Nigeria commissioned Rethink Priorities to conduct a detailed cost-effectiveness analysis of its intervention. It trains women health workers to provide family planning counseling and distribute an injectable contraceptive called Sayana Press in remote parts of rural northern Nigeria. The researchers also conducted uncertainty analysis of their findings using Monte Carlo simulations.

Summary and Key Takeaways

• We model the near-term cost-effectiveness (2024-2025) of Lafiya Nigeria's (n.d.) intervention, in which they upskill trained female health workers to provide family planning counseling and distribute injectable contraceptives (Sayana Press, or DMPA-SC) to women in remote parts of rural northern Nigeria.
• We estimate that the cost-effectiveness of the intervention is $19 per unintended pregnancy averted at the beginning of 2024, falling to $7 per unintended pregnancy by the end of 2025 when approximately calibrating the model to the current and planned rate of intervention scaling.
  • We provide [...]

---

Outline:

(00:35) Summary and Key Takeaways

(04:08) Acknowledgments

The original text contained 2 images which were described by AI.

---

First published:

October 23rd, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/rzLufDabN4kEwe2jS/cost-effectiveness-analysis-of-lafiya-nigeria-intervention

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Funding circles represent a simple yet powerful way to improve donor coordination across cause areas. We at AIM Grantmaking have recently published a Funding Circles Guide, explaining when they can be useful, what constitutes a good funding circle, and how to start one.

Who this is for: We invite funders to have a read and consider joining an existing circle or setting one up in their preferred cause area to improve coordination in their field, facilitate decision-making and comprehensive coverage, and save time and effort on streamlined application processes for both applicants and funders.

Background: In writing this guide, we relied on our experience setting up five AIM Funding Circles over the past year, focusing on diverse areas like global health & development, mental health, animal welfare, meta, and seed stage charities.

Potential next steps: If you're interested in learning more about funding circles or discussing how they might [...]

---

Outline:

(01:25) Purpose of a funding circle

(03:59) Key Components of a Funding Circle

(04:10) Membership Criteria

(05:39) The Circle's Grantmaking Process

(06:49) Examples from the Field: Funding Circles in Action

(07:29) Lower Coordination Examples

(07:57) Mid-Level Coordination Examples

(08:25) Higher Coordination Examples

(09:08) Starting Your Own Funding Circle

(10:12) A Default Structure for Funding Circles

(11:50) Tips for Running a Great Funding Circle

(12:02) What Works Well

(13:31) What Hasnt Worked Well

(14:42) Areas with Mixed or Unclear Results

(15:32) Conclusion

The original text contained 1 image which was described by AI.

---

First published:

October 23rd, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/vifXRWZsHJYdSB5d2/funding-circles-an-aim-guide-to-improving-donor-coordination-2

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Summary

In this post, we explore different ways of understanding and measuring malevolence and explain why individuals with concerning levels of malevolence are common enough, and likely enough to become and remain powerful, that we expect them to influence the trajectory of the long-term future, including by increasing both x-risks and s-risks. For the purposes of this piece, we define malevolence as a tendency to disvalue (or to fail to value) others’ well-being (more). Such a tendency is concerning, especially when exhibited by powerful actors, because of its correlation with malevolent behaviors (i.e., behaviors that harm or fail to protect others’ well-being). But reducing the long-term societal risks posed by individuals with high levels of malevolence is not straightforward.

Individuals with high levels of malevolent traits can be difficult to recognize. Some people do not take into account the fact that malevolence exists on a continuum, or do not [...]

---

Outline:

(00:09) Summary

(04:18) Malevolent actors will make the long-term future worse if they significantly influence TAI development

(05:33) Important caveats when thinking about malevolence

(05:38) Dark traits exist on a continuum

(07:32) Dark traits are often hard to identify

(08:56) People with high levels of dark traits may not recognize them or may try to conceal them

(12:18) Dark traits are compatible with genuine moral convictions

(13:24) Malevolence and effective altruism

(15:23) Demonizing people with elevated malevolent traits is counterproductive

(20:17) Defining malevolence

(21:05) Defining and measuring specific malevolent traits

(21:35) The dark tetrad

(25:04) Other forms of malevolence

(25:08) Retributivism, vengefulness, and other suffering-conducive tendencies

(26:57) Spitefulness

(28:17) The Dark Factor (D)

(29:30) Methodological problems associated with measuring dark traits

(30:41) Social desirability and self-deception

(31:15) How common are malevolent humans (in positions of power)?

(33:04) Things may be very different outside of (Western) democracies

(33:33) Prevalence data for psychopathy and narcissistic personality disorder

(34:22) Psychopathy prevalence

(36:27) Narcissistic personality disorder prevalence

(40:39) The distribution of the dark factor + selected findings from thousands of responses to malevolence-related survey items

(42:14) Sadistic preferences: over 16% of people agree or strongly agree that they “would like to make some people suffer even if it meant that I would go to hell with them”

(43:44) Agreement with statements that reflect callousness: Over 10% of people disagree or strongly disagree that hurting others would make them very uncomfortable

(44:46) Endorsement of Machiavellian tactics: Almost 15% of people report a Machiavellian approach to using information against people

(45:22) Agreement with spiteful statements: Over 20% of people agree or strongly agree that they would take a punch to ensure someone they don’t like receives two punches

(45:58) A substantial minority report that they “take revenge” in response to a “serious wrong”

(46:46) The distribution of Dark Factor scores among 2M+ people

(49:13) Reasons to think that malevolence could correlate with attaining and retaining positions of power

(49:44) The role of environmental factors

(52:29) Motivation to attain power

(54:11) Ability to attain power

(59:36) Retention of power

(01:00:59) Potential research questions and how to help

(01:17:45) Other relevant research agendas

(01:18:29) Author contributions

(01:19:23) Acknowledgments

(01:20:07) Appendices

The original text contained 67 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

The original text contained 3 images which were described by AI.

---

First published:

October 23rd, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/QmoqgLThjATbAeyQr/what-is-malevolence-on-the-nature-measurement-and

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

This is a link post.

Seven Samotsvety forecasters give their probabilities for different possible catastrophes to lead to more than 1M direct deaths in any one year, in any of the next 10 years. This post presents results, starting with a table which presents the probabilities, continuing with a discussion of each of the items, and concluding with some thoughts on relevance for Sentinel's work averting or mitigating incipient calamities.

Some forecasters found some questions in particular much more interesting, so we alternate between presenting the probability of the best model when one such exists, and the geometric mean of the odds when it's a risk that requires more subjective judgment and we have enough judgments to aggregate. Events that could fall into different buckets can resolve more than one bucket. For instance, an AI-invented biological weapon used during WW3 would resolve the “AI”, “biological weapons” and “WW3” buckets.

Summary

CalamityProbabilityRangeType [...]

---

Outline:

(01:02) Summary

(01:39) War

(03:46) Natural pandemic

(05:37) The unexpected

(07:14) WW3 specifically

(08:31) AI

(10:33) Unintentional biochem

(11:14) Biological weapons

(13:03) Climate change

(14:16) Volcanoes

(21:34) US civil war

(23:14) Financial crisis (e.g., hyperinflation)

(25:27) Solar storm

(30:09) Simulation shutdown

(31:12) Asteroid impact

(32:50) Alien invasion

(33:37) Vacuum decay, spontaneous black holes, doomsday particles, or other weird physics-based catastrophes

(34:22) Conclusion and reflections

(35:30) Acknowledgements

(36:12) Appendix

(36:16) Shortcuts taken

(37:03) Other items we might have forecasted

The original text contained 4 images which were described by AI.

---

First published:

October 22nd, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/KZXkP9Qs8Sy8AWcpp/how-likely-are-various-precursors-of-existential-risk

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

I gave the opening talk at EA Global: London 2024. Here's a video of the talk and a lightly edited transcript.

​​EA has been on a journey over the past 13 years. It's no longer the scrappy collection of people in an Oxford basement that it once was. Many of us feel that we're at an inflection point, and it's important for us to own it.

As the new CEO of CEA, one of the most frequent questions I get asked is: what is CEA's relationship to the EA movement, and in particular, are we planning on leading the movement? I want to be clear that our relationship to EA is one of stewardship. Nobody controls EA. Even if someone wanted to, it wouldn't be possible given this is one of the most lovably disagreeable communities on the face of the planet. I'm not aiming for CEA to be [...]

---

Outline:

(06:36) Journey 1: The individual with the institutional

(11:32) Journey 2: Communicating inwards and outwards

(17:52) Journey 3: Engaging with EA principles

The original text contained 5 images which were described by AI.

---

First published:

October 22nd, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/6LpQzvfetr7uQtNpK/three-journeys-for-effective-altruism

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to improve the lives of chickens raised for food in the UK. 

Tomorrow, The Humane League UK (THL UK) will be heading to the High Court to challenge the legality of fast-growing breeds of chicken- Frankenchickens. At stake are the lives of one billion animals.

Our small team will be demonstrating outside the courts tomorrow morning. Inside, our legal team, Advocates for Animals, will be arguing that farming Frankenchickens breaches the Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007.

We are up against huge opposition with The Government, the British Poultry Council, and the National Farmers’ Union representing the interests of the £3 billion poultry industry. This really is a David versus Goliath case.

If you are interested in the legal intricacies of the hearing itself, you can watch a livestream of proceedings here on both Wednesday and Thursday. You can also [...]

---

Outline:

(00:05) We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to improve the lives of chickens raised for food in the UK.

(01:17) Frankenchickens

(01:59) THL UKs three-year legal battle

(03:09) The fight continues

(04:14) Our chances of success

(05:44) Support The Humane League UK

(06:01) The Humane League UK

(06:56) Our vision is that by 2050, weve stopped the worst and most widespread abuse of animals raised for food, and they’re treated with far greater compassion.

---

First published:

October 22nd, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/qCMC4cnWCi7yjcnCZ/tomorrow-we-fight-for-the-future-of-one-billion-chickens

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Rethink Priorities’ Moral Weight Project ran from May 2021 to February 2023. During that time, we developed a from-first-principles method for estimating differences in animals’ capacity for welfare. In the year and a half since we finished the project, we turned it into a book for Oxford University Press: Weighing Animal Welfare: Comparing Well-being Across Species. We’re pleased to announce that it's available now and free to access.

Why did a project about “moral weight” focus on differences in capacity for welfare? In this context and very roughly, a moral weight is the adjustment that ought to be applied to the estimated impact of an animal-focused intervention to make it comparable to the estimated impact of some human-focused intervention. Given certain (controversial) assumptions, differences in capacity for welfare just are moral weights. But in themselves, they’re something more modest: they’re estimates of how well and badly an animal's [...]

The original text contained 2 images which were described by AI.

---

First published:

October 22nd, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/d3ycWYWAtuHdZAfo6/weighing-animal-welfare

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Giving Season 2024 will be running from November 4th to December 31st. The Forum will look seasonably pretty, and we’ll run several mini-events, including an interactive donation election, a marginal funding week, a donation celebration, and multiple AMAs.

Precise colour scheme TBD

Giving Season will highlight effective giving, and help us donate better

Last year, Giving Season:

• Raised $30K through our donation election fund.
• Led to 2800 hours spent reading posts on the topic of effective giving.
• Led to more celebration of earning to give as a career path.  

This year, we’d like to focus on:

• Helping people make better donation decisions (via a more discursive donation election, discussed below).
• Encouraging more effective giving discussion — helping it remain part of EA culture.

The Forum will be seasonally decorated, and effective giving posts will be encouraged

Alongside the Giving Season banner on the homepage, we'll be highlighting [...]

---

Outline:

(00:29) Giving Season will highlight effective giving, and help us donate better

(01:09) The Forum will be seasonally decorated, and effective giving posts will be encouraged

(02:05) There will be a range of Giving Season activities, with focus on a marginal funding week and a donation election.

(02:33) November 4 - 10: Funding Diversification Week

(03:40) November 11 - 17: Marginal Funding Week

(04:25) November 18 - December 3: Donation Election

(06:19) December 16 - 22: Pledge Highlight

(06:45) December 23 - End of Year: Donation Celebration

The original text contained 4 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

October 22nd, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/srZEX2r9upbwfnRKw/giving-season-2024-announcement

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

---

Images from the article:

Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

In short: Building weighted factor models using a regular weighted average (“weighted arithmetic mean”) allows high values in one factor to compensate for very low values or a zero in another. This poorly reflects the multiplicative nature of many impact-oriented weighted factor models. Using the weighted geometric mean avoids this issue by penalising low values more strongly.

Weighted factor models (WFMs) are a useful prioritisation tool when comparing multiple options based on multiple criteria. They’re simple mathematical models used to make decisions by assigning different levels of importance (“weights”) to the criteria. Each option is scored on all criteria, and a final score for each option is calculated by taking the weighted average of the scores. In effective altruism, WFMs are used to, for example, evaluate one's career focus, determine the beneficiaries of a development programme, or compare different interventions.

In many applications of a WFM useful for [...]

---

Outline:

(03:21) Some background: weighted arithmetic and weighted geometric means

(03:33) Weighted arithmetic mean

(04:48) Weighted geometric mean

(05:38) The problem with weighted arithmetic means

(07:16) Example 1: Which group of animals should we advocate for?

(09:27) Example 2: Which job should I pick?

(11:51) Example 3: Geographic weighted factor model

(13:39) When to use the weighted geometric mean

(14:32) When not to use the weighted geometric mean

(16:20) How much does this matter?

(17:19) Implementation in spreadsheet software

(17:24) Google Sheets

(17:51) Excel

(18:03) LibreOffice Calc

The original text contained 4 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

October 21st, 2024

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/86PYvFEJoZq8g87gk/weighted-factor-models-consider-using-the-geometric-mean

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.