It is so sad to see the "humans are creating suffering for humans" amplified right now

It also worries me, in the context of marginal contributions, when some people (not all) start to think of "marginal" as a "sentiment" rather than actual measurements (getting to know those areas, the actual resources, and the amount of spending, and what the actual needs/problems may be) as reasoning for cause prioritization and donations. A sentiment towards a cause area, does not always mean the cause area got the actual attention/resources it was asking for.

Interested in the human welfare intervention program! Could I reach out by DM to ask for the name? Also totally understand if you are hesitant to provide name as well. Thanks!

thanks!

I find it surprising when people (people in general, not EA specific) do not seem to understand the moral perspective of "do no harm to other people".  This is confusing to me, and I wonder what aspects/experiences contributed to people being able to understand this vs people not being able to understand this.

Great initiative; thanks! Would"This is a Draft Amnesty Week draft." also apply to quick notes as well? 

From some expressions on extinction risks as I have observed - extinction risks might actually be suffering risks. It could be the expectation of death is torturing.  All risks might be suffering risks.

Read some other comments, and career coaching from 80k sounds like a good suggestion!

Some other thoughts:

• if you have an area that you care about already, you could do active work in this area
• if you have not identified an area yet, AND it does not matter to you to work on things you care less about,  maybe find something interesting and relatively high paying for financial purposes and make monetary donations, or volunteering if you have time
• I believe there are all kinds of combinations of the above!

A few thoughts 

• Prohibition is a very US based concept for a specific era, and thus the env setting for this thought experiment will have to match the same level of context/available information back then in the US.
• There should also be disentanglement of policy intention and the actual way of doing executing the intention. For example banning alcohol at work place (in specific conditions basically, others includes driving), or risk of losing jobs if drinking at work, or limit max level of alcohol % could all be better approaches
• I don't know if EA actions is the ground truth of correct action or not, which is not what the question is about anyways, but just a thought (Prohibition may be an ineffective idea independent of EA values)