6 Comments
User's avatar
Andrew McDonald's avatar

Well, I lost interest about halfway in. This has to be the most most ‘first world problem’ in the history of first world problems.

UnabashedWatershed's avatar

I don't think this is trying to describe a problem? (First world or otherwise.) It is fairly "inside baseball" though. I wouldn't expect this to directly affect many people outside some specific nonprofits.

It might affect you indirectly though -- "billions of dollars are likely to be deployed by a small class of people with highly correlated worldviews" is newsworthy!

Shakeel Hashim's avatar

Especially when quite a lot of it looks like it’s going to flow into politics…

Y Olej's avatar

The tone of this is odd. The part about whether a massive influx of donations to AI safety organizations from the people who they’re supposed to be analyzing is good and important.

The rest seems like it’s trying to find other reasons to worry about a ton of charitable giving and doesn’t really make sense to me.

Are we really worried that folks might give billions to thoroughly vetted charities that could save millions of lives just because donors haven’t engaged with them directly and are trusting others who critics think maybe don’t know as much as they think?

Thomas's avatar

Maybe Claude-loving dipshits should stop making them wealthy

Jennifer Keith's avatar

Hoping billionaires will fund projects is a really fucked up way to run a society. I hope their stock crashes and burns.