EA Forum Podcast (All audio)

This month effective altruism has gotten lots of attention, including a cover story in The Economist. It feels pretty surreal to be on the receiving end of it. But I feel grateful these ideas have caught on, and even more grateful for the drive, earnestness, and compassion of so many people who took strange but well-argued ideas seriously and then actually acted on them.

Below is the op-ed I wrote for The Economist in response to their leader. It's cross-posted here in full. (The "Eccentrically Effective" title came from them, but I like it.)

-------

The Oxford strand of the effective-altruism movement began in November 2009 with 23 people who had pledged 10% of their income to charities that benefit the extreme poor. If you’d told us, then, that The Economist would call effective altruism “the century's biggest idea”, we’d have been incredulous.

I think that claim is overstated. But as one of the movement's founders, I found a lot to like in this newspaper's latest coverage. I appreciated the even-handed view of the movement's history and the good-faith criticism. The leader article's warning that any worldview, when taken to an extreme, can lead somewhere terrible [...]

---

First published:

October 7th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/imZtsr3Ww4c2zEMXA/eccentrically-effective

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

 TL;DR

• GOAL 3 is a social enterprise that created IMPALA, a patient monitoring and digital platform system for low-resource settings. There is also a GOAL 3 foundation that raises funds to ensure underserved communities will be reached.
• A recently completed report from Rethink Priorities calculated IMPALA to have a cost per DALY averted of 7 to 17 dollars in paediatric care and 12 to 30 dollars in neonatal care. This translates to around 76× and 28× unconditional cash transfers respectively for paediatrics and neonates against GiveWell's bar, and roughly 11,700× and 4,400× on Coefficient Giving's scale against their 1,000× bar.
• RP corrected for study design and robustness of findings by applying a 60% internal-validity and a 30% external-validity discount to our measured mortality effects, arriving at roughly 12% for paediatric wards and 7% for neonatal units.
• RP concluded that even at 1-2% relative reduction, the intervention would still be cost-effective.
• The post concludes with an invitation for discussion on what these results mean for further research and scaling of IMPALA.

Introduction

GOAL 3 commissioned the Rethink Priorities Global Health and Development team to provide an external analysis of the impact and cost-effectiveness of our product ‘IMPALA.’ IMPALA is a [...]

---

Outline:

(00:21) TL;DR

(01:42) Introduction

(02:19) Understanding the problem in its context

(04:12) Theory of Change

(05:38) What the RP report tells us

(07:43) Interpretation, strengths and limitations

(09:58) Reasons the estimate may be too low or too high

(11:50) Discussion: What would it take to fund scale-up now? How much more evidence, and of what kind?

(16:22) Next steps

(17:42) I want to read more about IMPALA, where can I do that?

The original text contained 12 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

October 7th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/fhGryFtF7iDnFEKtr/76x-cash-transfers-too-good-to-be-true-or-a-missed

---

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.

Epistemic status: I wrote this up hoping people can poke holes in it because I am quite worried.

 

Here's what we've heard so far:

• Local media is reporting that an employee of a BSL-3 lab in Irkutsk, Russia, died of pneumonic plague on Oct 1st.
• The initial quarantine covered 200 people who were in contact with the employee before she died.
• The FSB (Russian FBI) was seen assisting in the quarantine, which means it was not voluntary.
• Soviet-era whistleblowers like Ken Alibek claim Irkutsk was a major bioweapon development facility. 
   

As of Oct 4th:

• The quarantine has expanded to 5 hospitals in the area.
• The Russian government has switched to denial/coverup. Local news sources have deleted mentions of "pneumonic plague." 

• Local universities and schools have canceled some classes and extended mask mandates.
• On the lab's website, they mention gain-of-function research for making bacteria more virulent.  
• The White House is monitoring the suspected outbreak.

10/5 update:

• Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan are now doing quarantine health checks at the Russian border to contain the spread of pneumonic plague.
• Russian equivalent of HHS is now denying there was any accident at the lab at all.
• [...]

---

Outline:

(00:18) Here's what we've heard so far:

(00:51) As of Oct 4th:

(02:06) 10/5 update:

(02:29) Why this might be a big deal

(03:53) Why this might not be a big deal

---

First published:

October 5th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/jukqfkkeez3cCqxkC/how-much-should-we-worry-about-the-pneumonic-plague-lableak

---

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.

Epistemic status: I've been an academic, climate activist and research lead in Extinction Rebellion UK's Data Analysis and Insights Circle. I co-authored most of the studies below. I am writing in a personal capacity, drawing on extensive research into climate activism.

Summary

• People often decide whether a protest worked from a next-day poll or a hostile headline. I believe this is the wrong evidence.
• I see four common mistakes: polling the public when the targets are elites, measuring too soon, trusting what people say over what they do, and generalising from one audience to another.
• I end with five suggestions for funders and evaluators. Most apply to any movement that protests, including animal advocacy.

Most people in the UK accept that climate change is real, and most are worried about it. The majority (66%) even support nonviolent direct action to protect the UK's nature (Guardian). Yet very few take part in collective action. In 2023, five years after it was founded, only about 0.25% of the UK population (roughly 170,000 people) had joined Extinction Rebellion, a major climate activism group.

That gap between sympathy and participation is where a lot of arguments about whether protest "works" go wrong. [...]

---

Outline:

(02:18) What the evidence can and can't tell us

(04:15) Measure 1: polling the wrong audience

(06:30) Measure 2: measuring at the wrong time

(08:16) Measure 3: trusting the wrong kind of data

(10:40) Measure 4: generalising from the wrong people

(13:34) What this means for funders and evaluators

(14:54) References

---

First published:

October 5th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/P4wReSgW6MSKpQGvz/we-judge-activism-by-the-wrong-measures-four-ways-we

---

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.

Cross-posted from my substack.

Today, I’m launching the Wildlife Technology Fund at Renaissance Philanthropy.

The purpose of the fund is to scope, design, and manage coordinated research programs (CRPs), focused on making wild animal welfare interventions a reality. To do this, we’re prioritizing work that benefits both people and animals, often by working to solve some kind of wildlife conflict. While I believe we should work to solve all kinds of wild animal welfare issues, things that significantly benefit people and resolve conflicts will be more tractable to implement sooner.

We’re currently hiring for program managers to scope and manage CRPs. If you’re looking for varied work and high autonomy, this might be for you. Please share widely!

I can’t thank Wild Animal Initiative enough for doing the foundational work that makes this Fund possible. WAI is where these ideas were borne and refined, and the team there is responsible for the fundamental insights that make identifying positive interventions possible.

Over the next few months, I’ll share explanations of some of the program areas we’re exploring, and why they stand to help (at least) millions of people and billions of wild animals. For now, some [...]

---

Outline:

(01:28) What is a coordinated research program?

(03:13) How will the Fund work?

(05:06) What kinds of things will you focus on?

(07:33) Why Renaissance Philanthropy?

(07:54) How can people support the Wildlife Technology Fund?

---

First published:

October 5th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/bMph29wcdxpvDMrGF/wildlife-technology-fund-renaissance-philanthropy

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

Note: This post was crossposted from the Coefficient Giving Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post.

Subtitle: On vegan advocacy, effective altruism, and FIFA

I turn 40 today. Here are some hot takes.

On factory farming

1. Our biggest challenge is salience. If factory farming led the evening news, it wouldn’t last long. This low salience is self-reinforcing: even people who care deeply about it seldom bring it up. Yuval Noah Harari thinks “the treatment of domesticated animals in industrial farms is perhaps the worst crime in history” — and almost never talks about it.

2. Our main opponent isn't the meat industry; it's inertia. If battery cages and gestation crates had always been illegal, the industry could never have gotten them legalized. Defending the status quo is just far easier than changing it.

3. The meat industry isn't the omnipotent Bond villain some activists imagine, forever scheming to win the grand battle over the future of meat. It's a bunch of middle managers in Tyson fleeces in a business park in Springdale, Arkansas, trying to hit their Q3 targets.

4. [...]

---

Outline:

(00:32) On factory farming

(01:54) The future of farming

(03:59) Welfare reforms

(05:27) Unsolicited dietary advice

(06:45) Vegan advocacy

(07:51) Wild animal welfare

(08:25) Effective altruism

(09:49) Inside baseball

(11:08) On strategy

(12:23) Causes for optimism

---

First published:

October 5th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/c5Qcf8gcbFFHCfZNC/40-hot-takes

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

A conflict of interest to flag: I'm the founder of Settled, a relationship and matchmaking company with free and paid tiers. That may create bias in what I notice and what I recommend, so weigh these recommendations accordingly. I’d love for some of you to sign up to Settled, but my aim here is to share something useful whether or not you ever do.

What this post is and isn’t 

• We’re writing this because we hope it provide helpful insights - people have also asked, so here it is!
• This post is based on:
  • Hundreds of hours of interviews and coaching  with 350+ singles
  • Data from Settled: nearly 2K completed questionnaires & hundreds of feedback forms from dates we set up
  • An ongoing literature review (with help from Claude) - 70+ papers reviewed
• Our insights are observational, there's no control group and we collected all data for the purpose of setting up good dates, not research or analysis. We're including it because operational data from inside a matchmaking service is rare, not because it's complete or correct. 

Some observations and learnings from building Settled 

1. Dating apps are problematic; you should probably still use them

There [...]

---

Outline:

(00:32) What this post is and isn't

(01:22) Some observations and learnings from building Settled

(01:27) 1. Dating apps are problematic; you should probably still use them

(04:11) 2. Just ask questions and be on time.

(05:21) 3. We're bad at knowing how the first date went.

(08:29) 4. Physical attraction is just one ingredient amongst many

(10:53) 5. Dating doesn't have to suck.

(12:38) If this resonates with you, join us

---

First published:

October 5th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ecwyaawXhDjCmzHmb/what-i-learned-from-going-on-230-dates-with-eas-1

---

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.

Many people here have dismissed the value of biodiversity because

• it's not an x-risk

• an "ecosystem" does not experience qualia

• preserving large natural areas often conflicts with both economic growth and with boosting wild animals' welfare

However, if humanity survives to build a flourishing future, it's reasonable to think that the inhabitants of this far-future civilization will greatly value Earth's heritage of biodiversity, similar to how they will likely appreciate cultural & historical artifacts.

(The value derived from biodiversity could be a tiny 0.000001% percentage of total future value, yet at the same time be immense absolute amounts of enjoyment / appreciation / etc, more than we can even comprehend today.)

Previously, I've examined other common justifications for ecological value (ecosystem services + x-risk from ecological collapse) and found that they don't hold much water. I now think that, by relatively standard longtermist arguments, preserving earth's biological richness into the far-future is probably the most important aspect of environmental conservation actions we could take today.

Why would a super-civilization at technological maturity have any use for the highly imperfect products of five billion years' blind evolution? People today intrinsically value biodiversity for many reasons [...]

---

Outline:

(01:50) Variety

(02:26) Irreplaceability

(03:56) Historicity

(05:19) Cost-Disease

(06:27) Conclusion

(06:47) Does this actually affect real-world conservation decisions?

(08:12) Other Potential Sources of Value

(08:18) Animal Preference Utilitarianism

(09:24) Uncertainty about the true system of morality?

(10:18) We just like trees?

(10:53) How much do these values dominate our decisions versus other values?

The original text contained 7 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

September 28th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/AGEqHo5WHLiGQAJuw/reasons-why-far-future-civilizations-may-still-greatly-value

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

Previously: GiveWell raised less than its 10th percentile forecast in 2023 · GiveWell fundraising up 17% in 2024

GiveWell has published its 2025 metrics, together with a metrics report and a public spreadsheet. As in previous years, I focus on how much was raised and who gave it. This year I also look at how concentrated GiveWell's donor base is.

Truth be told I kinda phoned it in on this one, the full Claude version with better charts is here

Summary

• Returning donors gave 443.6 million dollars (up 77%). New donors gave 37.1 million dollars (up 112%), which is still below their 2020 to 2022 levels.
• 39 donors giving 1 million dollars or more contributed 359.7 million dollars. That is 75% of identified donations through GiveWell and 90% of the year's increase. Every smaller size band also grew, by 13–27%.
• The donor base is far more concentrated than an 80/20 rule. The top 20% of donors gave about 97% of the money, and about 0.26% of donors (roughly 90) gave 80%. Asking the question again within the top group (the top 20% of the top 20%, and so on) gives 94%, 93% and 92%, rather than 80% each [...]

---

Outline:

(00:47) Summary

(01:53) Returning donors drove the increase

(03:20) The increase was driven overwhelmingly by $1M+ donations

(05:22) Is GiveWell's funding 80/20? No: it is far more concentrated

(07:01) Pareto within Pareto

(09:23) Methodology and caveats

(11:33) Sources

---

First published:

October 2nd, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Xv7bHTipWDhRGrnHy/givewell-fundraising-up-49-in-2025-driven-overwhelmingly-by

---

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.

New account here, created by an irate outsider to EA.

I started typing this as a response to a comment by Austin, in the discussion of his recent shocking announcement that his organization Manifund has hired Caroline Ellison. My reply to him ballooned to a size that merits its own post.

Please bear with me as I attempt to somewhat match this forum's style. I will be consolidating some of the points that I and others have made less charitably on X and other sites.

--

General context:

Caroline Ellison, the former CEO of Alameda Research, was one of the convicted perpetrators of the FTX cryptocurrency fraud, along with her boss Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) and two complicit software engineers. Together, these four EAs stole billions of dollars from FTX's customers.

Austin Chen co-founded the Manifold prediction market, which received money from FTX, and he subsequently moved on to create a non-profit called Manifund (formally, Manifold For Charity), where Caroline Ellison now works for him.

--

Austin, I'm going to respond to this bluntly, even though I believe you meant well. This action creates an unacceptable flow of funds and benefits, starting with the FTX victims and ending with one [...]

---

Outline:

(04:06) A quick note about alternative facts

(05:35) The chain of obligation

(10:09) Your good intentions

(14:38) Option 1: Dismiss Caroline

(16:10) Option 2: Pay back the $500k to the FTX creditors

(18:17) Further concerns in the case of Option 2

(19:57) Option 3: Throw your entire contacts list into disrepute

The original text contained 9 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:

September 30th, 2026

Source:

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/R28zdK9bx6cLtBQxF/a-reply-to-austin-chen-on-his-keen-debt-to-ftx-when-hiring

---

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.