The world of private philanthropy may be in for a period of large growth. News of Coefficient Giving increasing their funding for GiveWell to one billion in the near-term, and the general growth of the effective giving community as reported by Giving What We Can, make it difficult for even hardcore sceptics (and I probably count myself among this curmudgeonly crowd) to stick to the view that we are in business as usual. There are many reasons to believe that this expected growth will happen, and I’d be remiss to not mention Nan Ransohoff's great piece on the matter. This article was a catalyst. Where before board members and execs who were particularly clued into the Bay area may have expected to see this change in the size of the giving market, Nan's piece gave this a name and salience. The third wave of philanthropy materialized slowly, and then all at once. This possibility of increased funding has now taken the shape of a near certainty in some circles. Besides the perfunctory “it may not happen” at the end of a long pitch, it is not uncommon to sit in conversations that assume the existence of this funding, and [...] ---Outline:(01:34) No such money(03:11) Smaller amounts(04:23) Absorption(06:24) What next? --- First published: July 29th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/xNnafgb8BAkysaHsh/what-if-the-third-wave-is-a-puddle --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

TL;DR NOVAH (No Violence At Home) was incubated by Charity Entrepreneurship (now Ambitious Impact) in 2024 to test a promising idea: preventing intimate partner violence through edutainment, in our case a serialised radio drama. Over the past two years we have produced and aired two seasons in Rwanda. We are currently evaluating our second season through a randomized controlled trial with 2,400 couples in Rwanda in partnership with Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA). Preliminary results are expected in October 2026. The end-line analysis is run by IPA and our academic partners, not by NOVAH. Edutainment to prevent intimate partner violence is promising, but it is still young as a field. We do not want to spend donor money scaling it unless the evidence shows it works at least as well as the strongest existing approaches. The RCT is what will tell us that. Therefore, before seeing those results, we want to make our decision rule public: We will scale our programming only if the RCT finds a statistically significant relative reduction of at least 5% in physical or sexual intimate partner violence prevalence. How quickly we proceed will depend on the size and certainty of the effect. Our current [...] ---Outline:(00:14) TL;DR(02:04) Background on NOVAH's cause area and intervention(04:03) How we are evaluating our impact(05:54) Our pre-commitment(07:10) What happens under each result?(07:14) Effect below 5%, or not statistically significant: pause and explore(07:47) Effect of 5%-20%: continue as planned(08:15) Effect above 20%: accelerate(08:33) Why did you choose a 5% reduction?(09:37) Is everything driven by this RCT?(10:55) Why make this public?(11:29) How you can hold us to this(12:00) Should more non-profits do this?(12:37) Final words(13:09) Learn more and get in touch(13:41) Appendix(13:47) Why do you use IPV-year instead of DALYs in your cost-effectiveness? --- First published: August 11th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Lz42uekYDBmBweq9f/what-would-make-us-scale-or-stop-novah-s-pre-commitment --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

BLUF: To determine whether AI is ‘improving exponentially’, ‘hitting the wall’, or any other claim which involves a quantity or magnitude (e.g. ‘This model was a big leap/small increment’). We need a good y-axis: an interval scale of AI capability which means +1 unit always represents the same degree of ‘how much better’, in the same way +1 degree Celsius is always the same amount of ‘how much hotter’. Yet there is no good y-axis for AI capability. All our measures are of something related-to but clearly not identical-with it, thus ‘true’ AI capability can be a funhouse-mirror reflection of whatever was measured. Specifically: Benchmark score: One small step in benchmark score can be a giant leap in capability, or the opposite, or whatever else. (My 6/10 vs. your 4/10 ≠ I’m 50% better at maths than you). Elo et al: Can give a real y-axis in terms of winning chances, but doesn’t translate outside of beating others. (Going from 50% to 73% to 88% chance to get a higher score than you on a maths test ≠ gaining 0 → 1 → 2 units of maths ability over you) Epoch Capabilities Index: Analogous to IQ, so [...] ---Outline:(03:05) Introduction(04:26) Both a poor reflection and a dark glass(07:51) Human benchmarking also has a y-axis problem(12:27) A metrological elegy(12:49) The base case: benchmarks (cf. exams)(13:30) Elo et al.(16:25) (And maybe not quite 'game ability ≡ winning games', after all?)(18:28) ECI (cf. IQ)(20:56) Intervals Rarely True(25:01) Measure endogeneity(31:12) Forking IRT(34:45) (Dimensions of being, and beating, a bat)(39:40) Prediction (cf. chronometry)(41:58) Time horizons(44:34) Human "capability" is also exponential in time horizon(47:38) Intuitive/interpretative prelude(52:56) Time horizons and ECI share an axis kink(57:13) Perhaps money, as a measure, stinks the least(01:01:07) Finale: AI as normal epistemics(01:06:48) Acknowledgements The original text contained 33 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: August 4th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/CQvdadxjCpd7i7kjA/general-capability-and-capabilities-generally-have-no-good-y --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

“Your balls are baked aren’t they, mate”. He would not have been bornThanks Lyndon, that describes the situation. Like almost 1 in 10 modern men, my sperm weren’t up to the task - at least not the old fashioned way. So IVF it was - the miracle that now feels almost commonplace. We landed on the moon and Woodstock changed music forever. But in 1969 a quieter event transformed the world. The first human embryo was fertilised “In vitro”, outside the body. Yet 10 years passed before one was inserted into a womb, and then born. 48 years ago, Louise Joy Brown was the first woman born through IVF. This year about a million babies will be born through IVF. IVF stands at the frontier of rich-privilege, a norm for the middle class in rich countries. In my home country New Zealand, the government even pays for it! Yet every week I meet women here in Northern Uganda who can’t have kids, and could never afford IVF. Even the human “right” to have a kid can depend on where you are born. If I was born 25 years ago, or in Uganda, my boy would never have [...] ---Outline:(00:13) He would not have been born(01:35) Our Risky Choice(03:47) He didn't die once - a routine miracle(05:33) He didn't die twice - Neonatal care(08:54) I am Grateful The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: July 28th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/KMNk8zXLxHQXgN7rK/never-born-then-maybe-died-twice --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

TL;DR We’re hosting an essay competition to elicit responses to Anthony DiGiovanni's sequence, ‘The challenge of unawareness for impartial altruist action guidance’—submit your entries by August 14th. There will be cash prizes for the best essays and the best comments: 7 thousand dollars in total. Additionally, we're offering an outlier prize of up to 50 thousand dollars for a truly exceptional entry: an original solution to cluelessness, or a critique decisive enough to move the debate. We’re also offering a referral prize of $250 if a winner says you’re responsible for telling them about the competition. Motivation When I announced April's Better Futures Highlight Week,[1] I confidently wrote: “To make the future go better, we can either work to avoid near-term catastrophes like human extinction or improve the futures where we survive.” But what if I was wrong? What if both options are bankrupt, and we have no justified answer as to whether any particular work would make the future better? In his Challenge of Unawareness sequence, Anthony DiGiovanni argues that we are in just this position. Specifically, he argues that our evidence about the future is so poor that our assessments of impact (explicit expected-value estimates [...] ---Outline:(00:12) TL;DR(00:54) Motivation(02:12) How the competition works(02:55) What your entry should look like(03:49) Option 1: Challenge a premise(05:19) Option 2: Challenge the inference(05:33) Option 3: Offer a constructive response(05:54) Prizes(05:58) Essay competition(07:43) Comment competition(08:09) How will the essays and comments be judged?(08:40) What comes after the competition?(09:00) Judges(09:13) Essay competition(09:33) Comment competition(09:50) Disclaimer(10:44) FAQs(10:48) Can I use AI?(11:21) Can I co-author a piece?(11:31) Can I submit a piece I've already published elsewhere?(12:03) Will I get feedback on my entry?(12:31) Does style matter? --- First published: June 19th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/2aooibAEDSdreCqrJ/announcing-cluelessness-critiques-competition --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Summary Back in November 2023 I posted here to launch Spiro and raise our first 198 thousand dollars. Two and a half years later this is an update and a fundraiser for the next step. The short version: we've now reached over-5,900 people with TB preventive medicine, including over 3,000 children under five years old. Our early results have held up well and GiveWell made us a grant last year. Now there's an urgent opportunity in front of us: US funding for community TB contact tracing across half of Sindh province in Pakistan ends this month. The provincial government has invited us to expand our work - taking on those 15 districts and expanding to cover all 30 districts of Sindh, up from the 7 we serve today. To do that we're aiming to raise 512 thousand dollars by the end of July, the most urgent slice of a ~1.8 million dollars gap for 2026–2027. By our own modelling, our work is in the ballpark of something that would meet GiveWell's bar - around $5,000 per life saved. But if we want to avoid a gap in coverage on the ground after the US pulls out, we’ll need to [...] ---Outline:(00:13) Summary(01:55) What Spiro does(03:35) Progress since our launch(05:14) The next opportunity: all of Sindh(06:22) We're fundraising for an urgent $512k now(08:01) Risk and uncertainties(09:37) How to give(10:07) The future for Spiro(10:27) Appendix: More on what we've done since Spiro's launch --- First published: July 15th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/hBoGLwKwMmizeRyZx/spiro-an-update-2-5-years-on-and-a-fundraising-ask-for --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

“How long have you been v*g*n?” This is one of the most common icebreakers at animal protection events. It's a baseline assumption, and it mostly holds true: if you’re out advocating for animals not to be tortured or abused, realistically these days you are v**n, or close. And it makes for good conversation. It seems fairly safe to assume when you meet strangers. But this assumption is hurting the movement in a way which we don’t always notice: someone new comes into the space, has a few conversations, realizes they’re surrounded by v**ns, and they have one of two experiences: a) if they are v**n, they feel like they’ve found their people; or b) otherwise they immediately feel out of place—maybe they’re stressing: “uh-oh, I’m realizing everyone else here is v**n, I probably need to be very cautious about what I reveal about myself, do I need to hide?”[1] This makes it hard to interact normally and they’re probably on track to silently not returning. Compare this to a slightly different world where the word never comes up—where you just get what you expected, namely participation in an animal-protection movement which you opted into. A dogmatic culture The V-word [...] ---Outline:(01:25) A dogmatic culture(02:18) Diet restrictions have costs, sometimes very high(03:43) Minimizing and gaslighting(05:45) There are lots of pro-animal people who eat meat(08:38) Language can change culture(09:56) Really? Stop saying the V-word entirely?(11:23) What to do instead The original text contained 3 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: July 12th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/fWyFHfZiFKg3GGzNf/let-s-taboo-the-v-word --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

Hello! I'm Justin Portela. I got hired by GWWC to make YouTube videos after AI in Context did such a kickass job. My channel is using that same cinematic, high-production value beauty to talk about everything in the EA universe that isn't AI. My first video is out now. It's about an obscure and unknown World Health Organization Meeting in 1955 that helped shape the conditions that have left up to 40 million people dead of malaria in sub-saharan Africa. I think it's pretty dope. I hope you do too. What you can do Watch it, subscribe to it, share it, do anything to help us reach more people. I made this channel to appeal to people who have never heard of EA. I want to be people's first introduction to the principles of EA and effective giving, so the more people that this reaches the better. Feedback? If you have thoughts, let me know! Either comment here or email me at [email protected] --- First published: July 7th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/8XXyGubWDWv2hEa5f/giving-what-we-can-s-first-youtube-video-is-out-now --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Note: This post was crossposted from Planned Obsolescence by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post. But we get the job done I was twenty one when I joined Open Phil,[1] as a zealous young EA who had idolized the organization since I was in high school (back when it was called GiveWell Labs). I worked there for over nine years, leaving about six months ago (shortly after it rebranded as Coefficient Giving). By the time I left, I was kind of a fixture in the organization, and a significant driver of culture and thought within the AI team of 45-ish people. My manager felt that a lot of people on the team would be worried to see me go, and encouraged me to convey that I believed in their work in my goodbye message. If you read that message, I meant what I said. I do think the kind of ambitious, foresightful philanthropy that OP (ugh fine, cG) does at its best is extremely impactful, and I do think the AI team is really great and has unique strengths. But before I articulated that, I sat [...] The original text contained 3 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: July 3rd, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/kMsrxqF5BQcX5FEAr/i-m-never-satisfied --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

I used AI to fix transcription errors, rerrarange the ideas, and suggest tweaks to the title and some sentences. Three of the most exciting projects to come out of EA in recent years are, in a vague sense, CEA spinouts: Kairos is directly a spinout of CEA and now handles most support for university AI safety groups. Basically everyone I've found who knows them is really excited about what they do NEST is an opinionated ideas-first support network for EA (university) groups. And you can see from Matt's blog the absolutely insane care he has for us. BlueDot grew out of a group of Cambridge EAs that wanted to make much better introductions to EA topics than what was available out there, and now they're basically trying to solve the talent gap for anything bad AI forever after My natural next thought, is that maybe some more of the responsibilities currently conceived as “CEA's job” would be better handled by small teams not directly (or only very loosely affiliated with) CEA. Beyond the previous examples, there's many advantages to small independent teams here: You can take risks that CEA can't You can kindle a culture that promotes ambitious [...] --- First published: July 3rd, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ovSoLXJHNu2LbcsDb/mabye-do-the-thing-you-wish-cea-would-do --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.