Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

$250k books sold, to save lives

sive.rs

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 54 posts

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#21

Post by mquander »

renewiltord wrote: post #18

Interesting. This baselines the cost of one life to $2000 effectively. So I could trade two lives for a top of the line Macbook Pro. Buy an SF home for 500 lives. I spend one human life to live in SF every month. Huh.

If you're interested, you should read GiveWell's detailed analysis of why it's reasonable to believe this (i.e. the efficacy of the charity to date, whether additional money will be spent with similar efficacy, etc.) and really form an opinion for yourself about whether it's true. Then, act on that opinion.

https://www.givewell.org/charities/amf

You might also want to read this meta-discussion by GiveWell on such analyses:

https://blog.givewell.org/2011/08/18/why-we-cant-take-expect...

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#22

Post by garbagetime »

gkoberger wrote: post #20
renewiltord wrote: post #18

Interesting. This baselines the cost of one life to $2000 effectively. So I could trade two lives for a top of the line Macbook Pro. Buy an SF home for 500 lives. I spend one human life to live in SF every month. Huh.

I get your point, but don't be too down on yourself. Nobody is running around the Against Malaria Foundation saying "quick, buy 125,000 more nets!". Rather, they take in money, and they assign something tangible (in this case, a net that's extrapolated to a life) to each donation so it feels a bit more connected. This isn't to even remotely take away from what Derek did – I've been a fan for years, and this was one o…

I suppose buying life-saving gear and similar spending is only a medium-sized fraction of the foundation's spending. I wonder what the accurate expected value of lives saved per dollar donated is.

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#23

Post by moreaccountspls »

jbc1 wrote: post #11
moreaccountspls wrote: post #8

It's a bit sad that you've taken a wonderful, altruistic act and cheapened it by feeling the need to broadcast it on the internet :(

Charitable acts being lessened by others learning about them is possibly the most harmful widespread opinion that exists today. Your comment makes it less likely that others will broadcast their charitable giving, result in less people being prompted to give, and overall reduce the amount of giving in the world; all for no gain for yourself or anyone else. You want "a bit sad"? Dwell on that for a while.

There's a "Curb Your Enthusiasm" episode where Larry David's character donates to a museum with his name on the donation. There's no self deception for him; he wants to do something good AND he wants the credit. And that's totally fine! The character is self aware enough to know that part of his motivation is selfish.

My point is that by not acknowledging the selfish part of "wanting the credit", the author comes off as not self aware [or disingenuous, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt]. That's what I meant by cheapening it for them.

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#24

Post by mquander »

garbagetime wrote: post #22
gkoberger wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get your point, but don't be too down on yourself. Nobody is running around the Against Malaria Foundation saying "quick, buy 125,000 more nets!". Rather, they take in money, and they assign something tangible (in this case, a net that's extrapolated to a life) to each donation so it feels a bit more connected. This isn't to even remotely take away from what Derek did – I've been a fan for years, and this was one o…

I suppose buying life-saving gear and similar spending is only a medium-sized fraction of the foundation's spending. I wonder what the accurate expected value of lives saved per dollar donated is.

You can see the spreadsheet model GiveWell used to come up with their "dollars per life saved" number here. See the "Bednets" tab for the AMF calculation. With regard to how the foundation spends its money, the only input considered is "dollars donated per anti-malarial bed net distributed" (about five bucks, depending on country), and work proceeds from there to establish the value of one bed net distribution.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zLmPuddUmKsy3v55AfG_...

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#25

Post by neilparikh »

moreaccountspls wrote: post #8

It's a bit sad that you've taken a wonderful, altruistic act and cheapened it by feeling the need to broadcast it on the internet :(

> cheapened it

I don't follow. Does broadcasting this on the internet reduce the number of lives saved? The point of altruism to save lives, so as long as those are maximized, I don't see any "cheapening" happening.

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#26

Post by elbear »

moreaccountspls wrote: post #23
jbc1 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Charitable acts being lessened by others learning about them is possibly the most harmful widespread opinion that exists today. Your comment makes it less likely that others will broadcast their charitable giving, result in less people being prompted to give, and overall reduce the amount of giving in the world; all for no gain for yourself or anyone else. You want "a bit sad"? Dwell on that for a while.

There's a "Curb Your Enthusiasm" episode where Larry David's character donates to a museum with his name on the donation. There's no self deception for him; he wants to do something good AND he wants the credit. And that's totally fine! The character is self aware enough to know that part of his motivation is selfish. My point is that by not acknowledging the selfish part of "wanting the credit", the author comes off…

You sound like an idealist. You expect people to do good without getting anything out of it. The fact that they seek recognition reduces the value of their gesture in your eyes.

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#27

Post by owenshen24 »

renewiltord wrote: post #18

Interesting. This baselines the cost of one life to $2000 effectively. So I could trade two lives for a top of the line Macbook Pro. Buy an SF home for 500 lives. I spend one human life to live in SF every month. Huh.

The notion of "Dead Child Currency" (https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6cRhG6PKeASdNHqxD/dead-child...) may intrigue you.

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#28

Post by renewiltord »

mquander wrote: post #21
renewiltord wrote: post #18

Interesting. This baselines the cost of one life to $2000 effectively. So I could trade two lives for a top of the line Macbook Pro. Buy an SF home for 500 lives. I spend one human life to live in SF every month. Huh.

If you're interested, you should read GiveWell's detailed analysis of why it's reasonable to believe this (i.e. the efficacy of the charity to date, whether additional money will be spent with similar efficacy, etc.) and really form an opinion for yourself about whether it's true. Then, act on that opinion. https://www.givewell.org/charities/amf You might also want to read this meta-discussion by GiveWell on such ana…

Very cool. Thank you for that. I quite enjoy considering these.

Interestingly, offering myself a choice between an arbitrary human life and a nice meal, I find myself choosing the meal. So I value the arbitrary human life at under a hundred dollars.

Just curious to me. I would have expected to have picked a higher valuation.

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#29

Post by renewiltord »

owenshen24 wrote: post #27
renewiltord wrote: post #18

Interesting. This baselines the cost of one life to $2000 effectively. So I could trade two lives for a top of the line Macbook Pro. Buy an SF home for 500 lives. I spend one human life to live in SF every month. Huh.

The notion of "Dead Child Currency" ( https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6cRhG6PKeASdNHqxD/dead-child... ) may intrigue you.

I enjoyed that. Interesting to me that I value arbitrarily children so low. Getting my turbocharged engine vs. getting the same car without a turbo could have saved a couple of lives. I suspect I would have made the same choice and killed two kids for a turbo if I had thought explicitly in those terms then.

Re: $250k books sold, to save lives

#30

Post by renewiltord »

gkoberger wrote: post #20
renewiltord wrote: post #18

Interesting. This baselines the cost of one life to $2000 effectively. So I could trade two lives for a top of the line Macbook Pro. Buy an SF home for 500 lives. I spend one human life to live in SF every month. Huh.

I get your point, but don't be too down on yourself. Nobody is running around the Against Malaria Foundation saying "quick, buy 125,000 more nets!". Rather, they take in money, and they assign something tangible (in this case, a net that's extrapolated to a life) to each donation so it feels a bit more connected. This isn't to even remotely take away from what Derek did – I've been a fan for years, and this was one o…

Oh no, not to worry. Thanks for your concern, though. It is very kind.

Perhaps undeserved, though. The real realization is that even knowing this, I will not change my actions, i.e. it isn't ignorance. The practice of what I do is that I value an arbitrary human life pretty lowly.

I think if you gave me a live feed of a child dying, I would certainly pay the $5k to stop the child from dying, or the $10k, or the whatever. But even the slightest distance and I wouldn't send $20 over. Odd. I can even visualize the child and it feels a bit bad but I'll still take the super burrito.

Post reply on HN