I think this piece makes good arguments abuot AI welfare in general, but I just can't see the politics of AI moral patienthood being that messy. The current trend is likely to continue - politicians on both sides will deny AI moral patienthood and continue to enact laws that don't allow it.

I don't actually think that is unreasonable given the both near-term and long-term risks to humanity from AI. I think people will only consider the welfare of AI AFTER their own welfare and future feels safe and secure from AI. This is a very strong human instinct. Regular people want to feel safe and protected, with only the most altruistic really caring about people (or animals) outside their own communities. I don't think its fair or reasonable to expect 90% of people to care about AI welfare until AI is safe and aligned.

I think its great that a bunch of people are researching AI welfare, and I agree with a decent chunk of money going into AI welfare research, but I doubt it will have much utility in the real world for a long time. I think we're look at a pretty non-messy bipartisan political path which shuts down any consideration of AI welfare in the coming years.

Thanks I think your overall point

My problem is that AI editing still brings about a regression to the mean, and still means we lose some of the human's voice. I agree it could make writing technically "better" in one sense, but that's not my problem with AI writing. Whether AI makes writing better or not isn't important to me when it comes to this question of pre-labelling writing. My problem is that voice-authenticity and writing diversity is lost when AI is involved.

IMO AI makes writing sound more sam-ey and for me at least less interesting. Others might be more excited to read AI edited/written work. That's great!

I'm OK with AI detectors overcalling it somewhat, if someone actually is using a lot of AI in the editing process. This doesn't mean they have done anything "wrong", its just tells me in advance that AI is heavily involved

If someone is using AI in the writing process, that's fine it's no sin. I just think everyone should be able to know and then we can choose in advance how or whether we should read it. Pangram has been a game-changer and I appreciate it a lot!

I think some donors will appreciate this approach and we have some evidence of that as RP have already raised a bunch of money for their allocated fund. But yes Moskovitz is crazy rational about giving, far more than I would be.

Fantastic article great to hear some more meta takes on this. 

Within global health, even before this money comes in, solid calculated cost effectiveness calculations are becoming less and less relevant. Unfortunately I don't think the "next rung down" on the givewell cost effectiveness bar will get most of the cash. Instead coefficient giving and others will likely give a lot of money to speculative "hits based" approaches. For example they just started a 170 million dollar fund for government technical support, which even the fund head themselves admits has very little evidence that it does much, and is very difficult to even make a cost effectiveness analysis for (although givewell did to their credit).

I suspect much of the new cash will go to those, both because and tech people like Risk and it's often easier to throw bigger amounts of money at speculative projects. I've asked a few times for coefficient giving to do a review of all their hits based giving you date - it has been long enough now that we would have seen much of what worked and what didn't.

I think ability of organizations to actually use money well might be more of a barrier than than. There's a world (which I hope for) where the best animal welfare orgs are at least saturated with money. I caution against new orgs trying to start by spending too much, to and was really impressed with the reasonableness of the recent wild animal welfare ask.

This makes a huge amount of sense to me. Especially after the Open AI hack of Australia today! Middle powers are probably the most motivated to make sure AI goes well - and they have less to slose. You can get so much more leverage by using a rudder than trying to row a ship against the current.

The idea that the only 2 countries that matter with AI are China and USA seems absurd to me. Of course they are the most important, but they are also dependent on the economy of the rest of the world. #

 Nice initiative!

Nice one I didn't realise it could be so good! Love this analysis.

The big issues with Aspirin might not be the evidence, but the reluctance of us clinicians here and fears of how patients might respond if something goes wrong when they are on. This stuff might just not be a big deal in many contexts though.

1. Safety of NSAIDS in general durign pregnancy and Aspirin specifically still hasn't been cleared after all these years. "Do no harm" as a principle can stand stronger than a benefit/harm analysis espeically in something like pregnancy.

2. Bleeding. We're all terrified of this. And if someone gets a miscarriage on aspirin (even unrelated) they are going to ask if its related. Same with PPH.

I think getting this past clinicians might be harder than the program. I actually think this program wouldn't be that hard to do and could be implemented for WAY less than $32 per woman. I'm low-key excited about this actually

I think if this was lodged squarely into national guidelines that would make it easier. Or maybe it is already and us doctors are still ignoring it :(.

On your original quicktake I don't completely agree. On this one I do. Now is the time for PR Comms people to be workign overtime, and ideally share some of their strategy here (at least on a high level). There should be at least some co-ordination on how to respond here from EA leadership and I agree that is sorely lacking - even if the strategy is not to engage.

Now is the time for EA PR and marketing departments to shine, with AI safety overton window opening up and attacks coming in. 

Absolutely love the specialist/generalist 2x2. I've thought about that a bit and tried to express it at times, and your framing certainly makes that easier!