It makes me genuinely curious why I'm receiving negative votes.

I understand that my perspective is limited. I would like to broaden my perspective. -1 or -2 is not a very telling signal.

Is it because of the content?

Is it because of the form factor?

This was a linkpost - linking to the blog (blockchain based publishing platform, less likely to be cancelled)

I genuinely believe that ENDING WAR would be in the best interest of humanity and the strategy of claiming mental health issue, disputed land in international jurisdiction, potentially even "breadbasket for the world" due to fertile soil: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernozem

I notice a pattern, often my proposals / ideas / suggestions are downvoted, for example here: https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/a/24170/14546

Another project that was in the planning phase 100 years ago. I know it is big, I know many things would need to align, I know there is no obvious financing model but I really hope to inspire and showcase ideas that are outside of the mainstream.

In this particular example - I genuinely feel EA is biased towards easily quantifiable projects. Building "Great African Railway" has so many 2nd 3rd 4th order effects - difficult task to quantify. I also described some other impactful projects that make intuitive sense but not instantly obvious how to measure impact.

Overall - I would love to receive feedback (why downvotes) and connect with others who think similar. Big impactful projects, not just spreadsheets and numbers.

The blog post describes the potential impact and difficulties of accurate evaluation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cape_to_Cairo_Railway

So this just happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Nigerien_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

And in the media reporting they said "Mali and Burkina Faso also experienced coup since 2020":

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Malian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_2022_Burkina_Faso_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

I genuinely believe that stability brings prosperity, no sane business would invest in such countries.

WOW

Something new dropped: https://twitter.com/FLIxrisk/status/1646539796527951872

Direct link to the policy: https://futureoflife.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/FLI_Policymaking_In_The_Pause.pdf

My reply: https://twitter.com/marsxrobertson/status/1646583463493992462

I'm deeply in "don't trust verify" camp.

Monitor the energy usage.

Climate change is for real and we need to cut the emissions anyway.

My assumption is: "it takes computer power to train the AI"

"Data centres are estimated to be responsible for up to 3% of global electricity consumption today and are projected to touch 4% by 2030." - https://datacentremagazine.com/articles/efficiency-to-loom-large-for-data-centre-industry-in-2023

A little bit more explanation / inspiration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics
 

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Another inspiration: https://earthbound.report/2018/01/15/elinor-ostroms-8-rules-for-managing-the-commons/

Laws of AI alignment:

Humans. Health. Mental Heath. Happiness. Wellbeing. Nature. Environment.

Buying us enough time to figure out what's next...

I guess there are not that many AI ethicists: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/5LNxeWFdoynvgZeik/nobody-s-on-the-ball-on-agi-alignment

What is the Shelling Point? This Forum? Less Wrong? Stack Overflow? Reddit? Some Twitter hashtag: https://twitter.com/marsxrobertson/status/1642235852997681153

Or maybe we can ask the AI?

AI may actually know what are the good principles 🤣

TLDR: more practical applications of existing research.

I think that these days everything competes for attention ("attention economy").

I think that popularising existing research and funding new - can go side by side.

But I wonder if the EA movement is allocating nearly enough money to new RCTs and program evaluations, or to R&D more broadly, so as to build out new evidence in a strategic way. 

I'm more on the practical side, implementing what we know so far.

Just like a brilliant product - will it go to market organically or will require a marketing push? Same analogy is applicable to research - more mainstream attention, popularisation, impact, getting on Joe Rogan and Lex Fridman, that in turn can provide more funds and interest to fund new research.

Overall it seems it is a balance - more new research will naturally trigger more new high quality research and more new real-life implications.

Another benefit I can think of - INDEPENDENCE - whenever something is sponsored by someone I wonder about incentives and spheres of influence.

TLDR: not just economic development and lifting out of poverty but a broader perspective of CLIMATE EMERGENCY and forced migration.

**********

I need to compliment the level of detail 👍

Apologies if my reply is not as detailed, I just want to cover a few points that stood out to me.

CTRL+F "climate change"

I support the thesis of the Deep Adaptation movement - inevitable near-term social collapse.

I collect links to various extreme weather events, most recently in Iran:

• 50C (120F)
• no water
• people on the streets
• police firing shots
• casualties
• #InternetShutdown trending on Twitter

Check this video by Amnesty International: https://twitter.com/greeneniigma/status/1420383736730947586

CTRL+F "refugee"

Related: https://refugeecities.org/

Key takeaways:

“We think it is unlikely that charter cities will be more cost-effective than GiveWell top charities in terms of directly improving wellbeing.”

Executive summary:

“We don’t believe that charter cities are a cost-effective method to lift individuals out of poverty directly.”

Improving well-being and lifting out of poverty - maybe not.

(malaria, mosquito nets, experimentation with price point that won the Nobel Prize in Economics recently to Esther Duflo)

Climate change and environmental migrants - maybe yes.

Why do I think charter cities are cool?

Global cooperation and governance at scale.

CO2 efficient building technology (during construction and lifespan for heating and cooling)

Check XPRIZE "Future of Housing": 

How many governments are willing to cede enough authority to create a charter city and how might this change over time?

Currently, there are around 200 sovereign states with a United Nations mandate.

I suggest Kazakhstan:

• loads of land
• religious balance (mostly Islam and 20% Christianity)
• open to Bitcoin mining (forward-thinking government)
• precedent of cosmodrome Baikonur leased to Russian Space Agency

Russians are building a new cosmodrome - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostochny_Cosmodrome - Baikonur might be available for sale?

The mission was declared a failure after telemetry was lost and the rocket re-entered the atmosphere due to the Fregat upper stage being programmed for a launch from Baikonur rather than the new Vostochny Cosmodrome.

Overall, I believe that Charter Cities is a political problem, not a technical problem.

Technology is there. Capital is there. Critical mass is there. Entrepreneurs are there. Now need to find a country that would like to invite entrepreneurs and capital.

😎

PS. Really great piece. Comprehensive. I will read it again and connect with various organizations mentioned here.