TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

‘Effective Altruism’ Is Neither

36 点作者 resalisbury将近 3 年前

12 条评论

finolex1将近 3 年前
This is a poorly researched piece that seems designed to drive a partisan wedge into the issue.<p>&gt; Actually, when you work, you already give to society, but that is too complex for some to understand.<p>Charitable giving is obviously in addition to whatever output is produced from one&#x27;s work. It is also directed more purposefully towards altruistic aims than random consumption.<p>&gt; I did a little digging, and I’m not so sure they’re effective at all. ... they also supply supplements for vitamin A deficiency, though genetically modified “golden” rice already provides vitamin A more effectively.<p>Does he really think that an organization devoted full-time to researching charities has somehow overlooked something basic found by a random WSJ columnist from a quick google search?<p>&gt; That’s a bit like closing the barn door after the horse has bolted<p>Future pandemics are inevitable, and there&#x27;s no guarantee they won&#x27;t be more severe than Covid-19.<p>There&#x27;s lots of room for criticism in the EA movement - in fact that theres an entire contest currently devoted to it (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;forum.effectivealtruism.org&#x2F;posts&#x2F;8hvmvrgcxJJ2pYR4X&#x2F;announcing-a-contest-ea-criticism-and-red-teaming" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;forum.effectivealtruism.org&#x2F;posts&#x2F;8hvmvrgcxJJ2pYR4X&#x2F;...</a>), but this is a poor attempt.
评论 #32225629 未加载
评论 #32225625 未加载
ChadNauseam将近 3 年前
&gt; And Mr. Bankman-Fried’s various entities, along with Cari Tuna and others, have put up about $19 million for a future California ballot measure, the California Pandemic Early Detection and Prevention Act, which would add a 0.75% tax on incomes over $5 million to raise up to $15 billion over 10 years. Catch that? Someone else pays. Effective, but not exactly selfless.<p>&gt; It’s the classic progressive playbook: Raise taxes to fund their pet projects but not yours or mine. I don’t care if altruists spend their own money trying to prevent future risks from robot invasions or green nanotech goo, but they should stop asking American taxpayers to waste money on their quirky concerns.<p>I hoped that after Covid, pandemic preparedness would stop being seen as a &quot;quirky concern&quot;, but it seems like we are incapable of learning from our mistakes.
评论 #32225535 未加载
dharmaturtle将近 3 年前
I donate to GiveWell, so I narrowed in on this section:<p>&gt; Yes, they direct money toward malaria nets and treatments for parasitic worms, but they also supply supplements for vitamin A deficiency, though genetically modified “golden” rice already provides vitamin A more effectively. Hmmm, seems like a move backward. GiveWell also suggests direct cash transfers to solve extreme poverty, similar to universal basic income.<p>A thread on golden rice on the EA forum: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;forum.effectivealtruism.org&#x2F;posts&#x2F;AF8hvNXFqhZsDmrTc&#x2F;should-gmos-e-g-golden-rice-be-a-cause-area" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;forum.effectivealtruism.org&#x2F;posts&#x2F;AF8hvNXFqhZsDmrTc&#x2F;...</a><p>It&#x27;s banned in many countries so it seems like supplements are the most &quot;effective&quot; way forwards.<p>If his best criticism of direct cash transfers is that it&#x27;s similar to UBI, I&#x27;m okay with that.
nicoburns将近 3 年前
I love the idea behind effective altruism, and it definitely has some merit. But unfortunately many of it&#x27;s proponents are hopelessly naive about what is actually effective, often falling prey to the trap of believing only what is measurable has value, and that is possible to measure the effect of actions taken in complex situations via mere statistical analysis.<p>This does gradually seem to be improving over time so I have hope for the future, but for now it&#x27;s a movement worth engaging with, but with a massive pinch of salt rather than swallowing their claims wholesale.
xorfish将近 3 年前
&gt; &quot;I don&#x27;t like these people and these people support EA, so EA is bad. Also I think trickle down economics is an accurate model.&quot;<p>This would have been a much shorter article without losing substance.
resalisbury将近 3 年前
This is not a well articulated or researched opinion piece, but it is interesting to see what some individuals initial reaction to Effective Altruism is. And in this case it is obviously negative.
otikik将近 3 年前
I will give this guy a point: Effective Altruism likes to mingle with crypto too much for my taste. I think if they stayed away from it their public image would be better.<p>The rest of the article is really ... well all opinion. &quot;I don&#x27;t like this, this is bad&quot;.<p>And yes, I realize that I did the same thing with crypto on my first paragraph. But I <i>would</i> have provided credible sources to sustain my claims if I was writing a piece on wsj.
评论 #32231952 未加载
PaulHoule将近 3 年前
Sometimes &quot;longtermism&quot; seems like a conspiracy to introduce a large number of fake issues (superhuman A.I.) to distract people away from action on climate change.
评论 #32224842 未加载
评论 #32225555 未加载
pessimizer将近 3 年前
It sounds wonderful to me. The only problem is that the politics of the people who are doing it are dogshit, but it&#x27;s also their money, and they&#x27;re doing what they want with it. Even if that thing they&#x27;re doing is bankrolling candidates to further their ideals.<p>As per usual, the hypercapitalist WSJ suddenly becomes Stalinist when people the WSJ doesn&#x27;t like decide to do what they want with their money, time, or speech.
telotortium将近 3 年前
EA is latest rebranding of progressive NGO complex, news at 11.
goethes_kind将近 3 年前
A bit of a tangential criticism: but does literally everything today have to be a movement and philosophy? Even &quot;doing good&quot; has to have a bunch of doctrine attached to it?<p>All this intellectual bloat probably ends up doing more harm than good, because as one famous contemporary philosopher says, all ideology is harmful.<p>Let everyone just &quot;do good&quot; their own way independently. Maybe that is in some ways less effective, but it also avoids the formation of cults, that will inevitable be taken over and abused by sociopaths.
Taylor_OD将近 3 年前
Nice hit piece by the wsj here.