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

Effective altruism has a sexual harassment problem, women say

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–417 of 417 posts

Re: Effective altruism has a sexual harassment problem, women say

#411

Post by cutemonster »

ketzo wrote: post #87
willcipriano wrote: post #5

Back in my day effective altruism was mainly about finding charities that aren't essentially scams (way harder than it looks). Scene has apparently moved on to other things since I followed it a decade or so ago.

This is a super-simplified summary, but I think it's generally accurate. The basic thesis of EA is "it is your duty to improve/save as many human lives as you can." At some point, a lot of EAs realized that there were many more future humans than present humans. Once you widen your scope in that way, you start realizing that long-term, catastrophic risks (climate change, nuclear disaster, misaligned AI) would affect…

> basic thesis of EA is "it is your duty to improve/save as many human lives as you can."

No, it's not about having any duty. (Where did you get that from? Friendly question)

Instead: If you want to help others, then, you can to stop and think, do some research (or read others') before deciding where to spend your time and money.

Something like that.

Still, a movement formed around a concept that involves money (donations, lots of them) and status (getting appreciation for helping others), is going to attract some of the wrong people. So maybe it's unsurprising that from time to time, we're reading negative things about movements formed around EA-the-concept. Although the concept itself is neither good or bad (well except for in some people's opinions).

Re: Effective altruism has a sexual harassment problem, women say

#412

Post by mistermann »

naasking wrote: post #408
mistermann wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This used to be Godwin's law. Hmmm, let's see: "Godwin's law, short for Godwin's law (or rule) of Nazi analogies,[1] is an Internet adage asserting that as an online discussion grows longer (regardless of topic or scope), the probability of a comparison to Nazis or Adolf Hitler approaches 1.[2]" "a term that is mutually agreed upon in advance, and when uttered by a participant it kicks off a well documented (and ag…

> I see very little similarity between these two things. I'm not sure what isn't clear: the trigger condition you're looking for is the first comparison to Nazis is made. Except as I said, by the time that point is reached I'm not sure productive discussion is possible.

> I'm not sure what isn't clear: the trigger condition you're looking for is the first comparison to Nazis is made.

I'm baffled, what are you referring to here? Why am I looking for a trigger of a comparison to Nazis?

Re: Effective altruism has a sexual harassment problem, women say

#413

Post by naasking »

mistermann wrote: post #412
naasking wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I see very little similarity between these two things. I'm not sure what isn't clear: the trigger condition you're looking for is the first comparison to Nazis is made. Except as I said, by the time that point is reached I'm not sure productive discussion is possible.

> I'm not sure what isn't clear: the trigger condition you're looking for is the first comparison to Nazis is made. I'm baffled, what are you referring to here? Why am I looking for a trigger of a comparison to Nazis?

You literally suggested:

> a term that is mutually agreed upon in advance, and when uttered by a participant it kicks off a well documented (and agreed upon) protocol ...

That term is a trigger condition for initiating a protocol. I suggested that the first comparison to Nazis is the trigger condition. What's unclear here?

Re: Effective altruism has a sexual harassment problem, women say

#414

Post by theragra »

pdonis wrote: post #19
theragra wrote: post #15

If there are less cases of abuse than among generic populace, it is weird to blame the movement. From the article, it is hard to understand that EA is somehow worse than most of the USA. Also, arguments for polyamory are just that, arguments. You certainly can press someone into it, but from the article, the impression that it is more like persuasion. Regarding cult dynamics - any tight knit community feels like this…

> arguments for polyamory are just that, arguments Which have nothing whatever to do with effective altruism. So it's perfectly reasonable for a person who came to a gathering expecting to talk about effective altruism, to be uncomfortable, to say the least, when she finds herself getting proselytized about polyamory.

I agree in principle, but isn't it like this often for any activity?

People talk, sometimes about sensitive or offensive topics. RN, i encounter people around me that have very strong opinions about war in Ukraine. Sometimes it comes to direct insults, and while this is unfortunate, i won't say some group is responsible. Specific person is responsible for their actions.

Re: Effective altruism has a sexual harassment problem, women say

#415

Post by theragra »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #173
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EA appeals to exactly that kind of really-smart-person who is perfectly capable of convincing themselves that they're always right about everything. And from there, you can justify all kinds of terrible things. I came to the same conclusion after a group of my friends got involved with the local rationalist and EA community, though for a different reason: Their drug habits. They believed themselves to have a better…

I can't imagine what benefits they were looking for in opioid use/abuse. Like, most drugs have a very distinct use, ranging from "directly beneficial" like using stimulants to increase productivity, to "socially useful" like using alcohol or MDMA as a social lubricant. Opiates don't really fall into any of those boxes. They're not mechanistically useful: If you want euphoria, there are better drugs like MDMA or ketam…

There are obvious benefits for using opiates for your life. You will be less agitated, calmer, kinder and will be able to tolerate unpleasant stuff better. I'm speaking also from experience.

Problem is, it always comes to not wanting normal undrugged life afterwards.

Re: Effective altruism has a sexual harassment problem, women say

#416

Post by jtode »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #359
jtode wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am out of the loop a bit, so I'll say that first. An acquaintance introduced me to the phrase effective altruism and talked about sending money to a place that's having problems rather than going there yourself, and I just thought, yah, that's a more effective way of being altruistic and went on with my day. I'm just learning that they made it into a cult. Who thought that was a good idea? Just be an effective altr…

> I'm just learning that they made it into a cult. EA has a lot of overlap with religion by its very nature. Any moralizing philosophy with dedicated followers will tend to become cultish.

I mean, I agree, but it seems to me that the abstract concept of being altruistic effectively is not moralizing at all - it merely carries the assumption that the actor has taken a moral stance and leaves it at that.

I saw it more like "If you are going to attempt to make your actions line up with your morals or ethics as a matter of principle, you should do it in a way that actually produces the result your ethics demand."

I mean I'm not really arguing, I know people are gonna do what people do...

Re: Effective altruism has a sexual harassment problem, women say

#417

Post by mistermann »

naasking wrote: post #413
mistermann wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure what isn't clear: the trigger condition you're looking for is the first comparison to Nazis is made. I'm baffled, what are you referring to here? Why am I looking for a trigger of a comparison to Nazis?

You literally suggested: > a term that is mutually agreed upon in advance, and when uttered by a participant it kicks off a well documented (and agreed upon) protocol ... That term is a trigger condition for initiating a protocol. I suggested that the first comparison to Nazis is the trigger condition. What's unclear here?

I think maybe the problem is that you seem to be classifying a highly specific concrete instance of a very broad abstract class as being equal to the abstract class itself (and thus: equal to all possible subordinate concrete classes).

>> how about we develop something similar for internet arguments, a term that is mutually agreed upon in advance, and when uttered by a participant it kicks off a well documented (and agreed upon) protocol where all participants downgrade System 1 thinking to zero and upgrade System 2 thinking to 11

> This used to be Godwin's law.

In this case, playing of the Godwin's Lawcard would invoke my recommended process, as opposed to playing of the Godwin's Lawcard being an instance of my recommended process.

> Except by the time that's triggered, your System 2 thinking dialed you to 11 almost always tells everyone it's time to leave that discussion.

Again, this claim would invoke my process, and would be accompanied by a reminder that it isn't actually possible to read minds or the future, it only seems like it is possible when running on System 1 heuristics.

But then, both my logic and intuition suggests to me that what's going on here is that you and I are talking past each other, and if we were to eliminate all of the numerous flaws in communication (for example: your usage of "the" trigger condition instead of "a" trigger condition[1]), we'd discover we don't actually disagree very much. But ain't no one got time for that, under current protocols.

[1] A common response to this style of complaint ("pedantry") is that one should simply assume [the correct intended] meaning - but again, this has a dependency on mind reading, which is a false premise (that seems true during realtime cognition).

Post reply on HN