News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Sam Bankman-Fried is a feature, not a bug by em-bee on Sunday November 05, 2023 @03:08PM (#38155110)
the problem seems twofold. on the one hand there is a seemingly objective definition of what Effective Altruism is supposed to be. that definition is one that i would like to subscribe to as well. on the other hand it appears that the idea of EA was popularized by someone whose actions didn't actually fit the definition which discredits the whole movement. that's the first problem.

the second problem is that we tend to redefine what things are based on the actions of those that promote them. it's the same thing that happens with religions. a lot of people now and in the past did things in the name of those religions that were a discredit to them.

the difficulty is to keep these things apart.

the consequence for me is that i can not associate myself with things like EA or blockchain development, because in the eye of the public now these do more harm than good. and for the same reason many not only leave their particular religion but disassociate themselves from the concept of religion itself.

Re:Sam Bankman-Fried is a feature, not a bug by nativeit on Monday November 06, 2023 @07:54AM (#38161928)
As near as I can tell, “Effective Altruism” is just the latest lame label for what is essentially “trickle down economics”, where some overly entitled individuals condescendingly try to justify some notion that they know how to spend money better than the plebs, so they must clearly be the obvious beneficiaries of any/all proceeds of any given transaction. It isn’t new, and it certainly isn’t helpful. It’s cynical and needs to be called what it is—a framework for extending and perpetuating income inequality while making those who benefit the most feel good about themselves.
Re:Sam Bankman-Fried is a feature, not a bug by em-bee on Tuesday November 07, 2023 @08:16AM (#38176361)
i don't see the connection. trickle down economics is about reducing taxes for high earners so that they can spend the money on things that will eventually benefit lower earners. that has nothing to do with effective altruism as far as i can tell.

at best i can see that high earners claim effective altruism for themselves, and are discrediting it with their actions, just like i said.

if you talk to people promoting effective altruism on the ground (which i had the opportunity to do recently) then you get a different picture.