Joanna Michalska
Bio
Participation1
How others can help me
I'm early in my career, so I'd like to learn what skills I should develop to be as useful to EA as I can. I'm also hoping to meet value-aligned people.
How I can help others
Reach out to me if you need some graphic design or illustration work done - I have some time to volunteer for the cause, no strings attached.
Comments11
PART 1
-
The lives of the 100 people living today aren't worth 10x more than the lives of the thousands living in the future, so I wouldn't bury the waste.
-
I would have still donated; I don't see much of a difference, and the time when the beneficiaries are alive isn't a morally significant factor.
PART 2 My judgement is terrible but my confidence is very low so let's hope they cancel out.
-
The causes I feel are the most important are factory farming, wild animal suffering and S-risks (these, I believe, cause or have the potential to cause the most suffering while being hugely neglected).
-
Key uncertainty: The tractability of working on wild animal suffering seems to be a huge problem.
-
What to do about the uncertainty: Read up on what is already being done (Arthropoda foundation, Wild Animal Initiative) and what the prospects are.
-
Aptitudes to explore: community building, organization running/boosting, supporting roles.
-
Keep volunteering for an effective organization while also recruiting new people into EA in free time; learn how to communicate ideas better.
-
I'm donating monthly to effective charities, volunteering my skills and engaging with the community.
My criticisms about EA:
As a negative utilitarian I'm bitter about all the X-risk prevention enthusiasts trying to stop me from pushing the big red button
Jokes aside - I got very excited about EA when I learned about it. At some point I became aware of the excitement and I had a concern pop up that it sounds too good to be true, almost like a cult. I consider myself rather impressionable/easy to manipulate so I learned that when I feel very hyped about something it should make me healthily suspicious.
I'm grateful for the article earlier in the chapter that presented some good faith criticism and I agree with some of its points
Some thoughts:
- EA may feel alienating to people who aren't top-of-their-field 150iq professionals. I very much relate to this post: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/x9Rn5SfapcbbZaZy9/ea-for-dumb-people . Maybe it's for the better and results in higher talent density and better reputation for the movement, maybe we're missing out on some skilled people/potential donors or critical mass.
- I'd love to see some statistics on why people leave the movement, and what the rate is. I suspect that moral perfectionism leading to self-neglect and burnout is an occupational hazard among EAs (like it is among animal advocates).
- It's somewhat difficult to talk about EA to regular people. Look, there's this movement that can literally save the world from apocalypse (cultish), and we also believe that shrimp welfare is important (insane). On the other hand, maybe I shouldn't start my conversations like that.
I may be mistaken, but I think the author was referring to positive beliefs (as opposed to normative beliefs), in which case your points 1 and 2 would be addressed. It's not made clear in this article but that's what I believe based on the context I first read this essay in (a series of blog posts collected in the book "Map and Territory"), which was more about seeking truth than doing good.
Hi everyone! I'm Joanna, 25 year old from Poland. My main EA interests are factory farming, wild animal suffering and s-risks.
I've been thinking of myself as a negative utilitarian for a long time, but the extent of my contribution was being a silent, resigned vegan. I hit rock bottom in September this year after reaching a conclusion that my life is probably a net negative for the world and that I unwittingly cause more suffering than my life is worth. I got support from a community built around David Pearce's 'Hedonistic Imperative' and that's how I learned about EA, so I guess you could say it saved my life.
Since then I've been volunteering for Anima International and offering skilled volunteering for other EA-aligned animal advocacy orgs as a graphic designer (feel free to contact me if you need some graphic design done!)
I'm also trying to decide what to do with my 80.000-n hours, but the more I read the less certain I am (and there wasn't much certainty to begin with). I've worked as a senior artist for the gamedev industry, so my skillset is pretty narrow and mostly redundant due to AI. So far I've finished some courses (mainly on effective animal advocacy and nonprofit work) and I'm now learning data science, economics and biology.
Giving status: monthly donations to ACE and Otwarte Klatki (Anima International); planning to take the GWWC pledge when I have stable income (I'm currently freelancing and in the process of transitioning to a more impactful career path)
degree of initiation into EA: I'm currently halfway through the EA Handbook and 3/4 through the 80.000 Hours career planning course; I've read 'Doing Good Better', '80.000 Hours', 'Map and Territory', 'Hedonistic Imperative', 'Thinking, fast and slow', 'Famine, affluence and morality'; started reading 'Animal Liberation Now', but it was too brutal. I also finished AAC's effective animal advocacy course.
Favourite EA forum post: on the fence between https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Dtr8aHqCQSDhyueFZ/the-possibility-of-an-ongoing-moral-catastrophe-summary and https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/RZEvk6cBtBg2mpgwS/trigger-warning-violence-animal-vs-human-welfare-sharing
Favourite EA book: 'Doing Good Better', (or, if I can go a bit wider, 'Map and Territory')
What I can offer: volunteering as a graphic designer, I'm also pretty good at tedious labour (like data cleanup) in google sheets.
Hoping to: get more clarity regarding career path and building skills useful for the movement.
Interests outside EA: metalearning, PKMs, productivity, psychology, art (the practical side of it)
Glad to be here!
Part A
Math + surface level considerations based on the information in the links (I'm new here):
Hellen Keller International
- lives saved: 23
- vitamin A supplements administered: 79 977
- evidence of impact: strong
- has room for more funding
Malaria Consortium
- lives saved: 16
- children seasonally protected from malaria: 11 425
- evidence of impact: exceptionally strong
- has room for more funding
Against Malaria Foundation
- lives saved: 14,5
- anti-malaria nets purchased: 15 995
- iirc the nets last for ~3 years (probably taken into account by GL already)
- it's a well-known charity within the EA community (to the point it's become a meme) so I cautiously assume it gets more funding than the others/is somewhat less neglected
- added factor of insect suffering? (how much suffering does dying from insecticides generate vs the alternatives)
New Incentives
- lives saved: 16
- children vaccinated: 500
- I assume the effects are long-lasting, so even if HKI or MC interventions are cheaper per person, NI vaccinations could be more effective when compared one to one (?)
- evidence of impact: strong
Part B
I'm hesitating between HKI and NI, so I'll use the numbers to break the tie/as a correction for my scope neglect and go with Hellen Keller International (they also stated they have more room for funding)
Part C
- impact of different career paths I'm considering
- I need to finally do an evaluation of the most effective food so I can just buy beans or legumes in bulk and not make calculations every time I'm grocery shopping
- impact of learning/self-development vs what else I could be doing in this time
I think offsetting your emissions and offsetting your meat consumption are treated differently by EAs because they really are different.
I liked the two examples presented by William MacAskill in 'Doing good better':
In the second case the damage is already done; by offsetting, you just prevent further harm. Eating meat while donating to animal welfare organizations is more like the second example. You harm some animals and then pay for some other animals to be saved. You can't undo the harm done to the animals harmed.