Does your vote matter? What the research says

The idea this week: the cynical case against voting and getting involved in politics doesn’t hold up.

Does your vote matter? Around half of the world’s population is expected to see national elections this year, and voters in places like Taiwan, India, and Mexico have already gone to the polls. The UK and France both recently scheduled elections.

And of course, the 2024 US national election campaigns are off and running, with control of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the White House in contention — as well as many state houses, governorships, and other important offices.

Sometimes people think that their vote doesn’t matter because they’re just a drop in the ocean.

But my colleague Rob has explored the research on this topic, and he concluded that voting can actually be a surprisingly impactful way to spend your time. So it’s not just your civic duty — it can also be a big opportunity to influence the world for the better.

That’s because, while the chance your vote will change the outcome of an election is small, it can still matter a lot given the massive impact governments can have.

To take a simple model: if the US government discretionary spending is $6.4 trillion over four years, and you have a 1 in 10 million chance of changing the outcome of the national election,

Continue reading →

    Dive into our most in-depth research on careers

    The idea this week: your career choices may be much more important than you think — and we have a lot of resources to help you think them through.

    Your career is one of your biggest opportunities to make a difference in the world and also have a rewarding and interesting life.

    That’s why we wrote our career guide — to help people create a career plan that’s aimed at having a positive impact and a fulfilling career.

    But there’s a lot of ground to cover, so we couldn’t do it all in a single book.

    That’s why we wrote our advanced series. It covers our most in-depth research on questions like:

    • What does it mean to “make a difference”?
    • What is “longtermism,” and why does it matter?
    • Is it ever OK to take a harmful job?
    • Can we balance doing what we love with having a positive impact?
    • What role should finding your personal strengths play in your career?
    • How should you coordinate with others when trying to do good?
    • How long should you explore different career options?
    • And a whole lot more!

    We hope the articles in our advanced series help you tackle these questions and accelerate you along your path to an impactful career.

    See the whole series here or just browse selected topics below.

    Continue reading →

      #190 – Eric Schwitzgebel on whether the US is conscious

      In today’s episode, host Luisa Rodriguez speaks to Eric Schwitzgebel — professor of philosophy at UC Riverside — about some of the most bizarre and unintuitive claims from his recent book, The Weirdness of the World.

      They cover:

      • Why our intuitions seem so unreliable for answering fundamental questions about reality.
      • What the materialist view of consciousness is, and how it might imply some very weird things — like that the United States could be a conscious entity.
      • Thought experiments that challenge our intuitions — like supersquids that think and act through detachable tentacles, and intelligent species whose brains are made up of a million bugs.
      • Eric’s claim that consciousness and cosmology are universally bizarre and dubious.
      • How to think about borderline states of consciousness, and whether consciousness is more like a spectrum or more like a light flicking on.
      • The nontrivial possibility that we could be dreaming right now, and the ethical implications if that’s true.
      • Why it’s worth it to grapple with the universe’s most complex questions, even if we can’t find completely satisfying solutions.
      • And much more.

      Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
      Audio engineering lead: Ben Cordell
      Technical editing: Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong
      Additional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa Rodriguez
      Transcriptions: Katy Moore

      Continue reading →

      #189 – Rachel Glennerster on how "market shaping" could help solve climate change, pandemics, and other global problems

      In today’s episode, host Luisa Rodriguez speaks to Rachel Glennerster — associate professor of economics at the University of Chicago and a pioneer in the field of development economics — about how her team’s new Market Shaping Accelerator aims to leverage market forces to drive innovations that can solve pressing world problems.

      They cover:

      • How market failures and misaligned incentives stifle critical innovations for social goods like pandemic preparedness, climate change interventions, and vaccine development.
      • How “pull mechanisms” like advance market commitments (AMCs) can help overcome these challenges — including concrete examples like how one AMC led to speeding up the development of three vaccines which saved around 700,000 lives in low-income countries.
      • The challenges in designing effective pull mechanisms, from design to implementation.
      • Why it’s important to tie innovation incentives to real-world impact and uptake, not just the invention of a new technology.
      • The massive benefits of accelerating vaccine development, in some cases, even if it’s only by a few days or weeks.
      • The case for a $6 billion advance market commitment to spur work on a universal COVID-19 vaccine.
      • The shortlist of ideas from the Market Shaping Accelerator’s recent Innovation Challenge that use pull mechanisms to address market failures around improving indoor air quality, repurposing generic drugs for alternative uses, and developing eco-friendly air conditioners for a warming planet.
      • “Best Buys” and “Bad Buys” for improving education systems in low- and middle-income countries, based on evidence from over 400 studies.
      • Lessons from Rachel’s career at the forefront of global development, and how insights from economics can drive transformative change.
      • And much more.

      Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
      Audio Engineering Lead: Ben Cordell
      Technical editing: Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong
      Additional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa Rodriguez
      Transcriptions: Katy Moore

      Continue reading →

      #188 – Matt Clancy on whether science is good

      In today’s episode, host Luisa Rodriguez speaks to Matt Clancy — who oversees Open Philanthropy’s Innovation Policy programme — about his recent work modelling the risks and benefits of the increasing speed of scientific progress.

      They cover:

      • Whether scientific progress is actually net positive for humanity.
      • Scenarios where accelerating science could lead to existential risks, such as advanced biotechnology being used by bad actors.
      • Why Matt thinks metascience research and targeted funding could improve the scientific process and better incentivise outcomes that are good for humanity.
      • Whether Matt trusts domain experts or superforecasters more when estimating how the future will turn out.
      • Why Matt is sceptical that AGI could really cause explosive economic growth.
      • And much more.

      Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
      Audio engineering lead: Ben Cordell
      Technical editing: Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong
      Additional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa Rodriguez
      Transcriptions: Katy Moore

      Continue reading →

      The most interesting startup idea I’ve seen recently: AI for epistemics

      This was originally posted on benjamintodd.substack.com.

      If transformative AI might come soon and you want to help that go well, one strategy you might adopt is building something useful that will improve as AI gets more capable.

      That way if AI accelerates, your ability to help accelerates too.

      Here’s an example: organisations that use AI to improve epistemics — our ability to know what’s true — and make better decisions on that basis.

      This was the most interesting impact-oriented entrepreneurial idea I came across when I visited the San Francisco Bay area in February. (Thank you to Carl Shulman who first suggested it.)

      Navigating the deployment of AI is going to involve successfully making many crazy hard judgement calls, such as “what’s the probability this system isn’t aligned” and “what might the economic effects of deployment be?”

      Some of these judgement calls will need to be made under a lot of time pressure — especially if we’re seeing 100 years of technological progress in under 5.

      Being able to make these kinds of decisions a little bit better could therefore be worth a huge amount. And that’s true given almost any future scenario.

      Better decision-making can also potentially help with all other cause areas, which is why 80,000 Hours recommends it as a cause area independent from AI.

      So the idea is to set up organisations that use AI to improve forecasting and decision-making in ways that can be eventually applied to these kinds of questions.

      Continue reading →

        #187 – Zach Weinersmith on how researching his book turned him from a space optimist into a "space bastard"

        In today’s episode, host Luisa Rodriguez speaks to Zach Weinersmith — the cartoonist behind Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal — about the latest book he wrote with his wife Kelly: A City on Mars: Can We Settle Space, Should We Settle Space, and Have We Really Thought This Through?

        They cover:

        • Why space travel is suddenly getting a lot cheaper and re-igniting enthusiasm around space settlement.
        • What Zach thinks are the best and worst arguments for settling space.
        • Zach’s journey from optimistic about space settlement to a self-proclaimed “space bastard” (pessimist).
        • How little we know about how microgravity and radiation affects even adults, much less the children potentially born in a space settlement.
        • A rundown of where we could settle in the solar system, and the major drawbacks of even the most promising candidates.
        • Why digging bunkers or underwater cities on Earth would beat fleeing to Mars in a catastrophe.
        • How new space settlements could look a lot like old company towns — and whether or not that’s a bad thing.
        • The current state of space law and how it might set us up for international conflict.
        • How space cannibalism legal loopholes might work on the International Space Station.
        • And much more.

        Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
        Audio engineering lead: Ben Cordell
        Technical editing: Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong
        Additional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa Rodriguez
        Transcriptions: Katy Moore

        Continue reading →

        Where are all the nuclear experts?

        The idea this week: nuclear war remains a horrifying possibility — our new nuclear career review examines what you could be doing about it.

        Here at 80,000 Hours, we’re often trying to find ways to protect future generations.

        If we’d been trying to do that in 1950, one thing would have been at the top of everyone’s minds: the terrifying threat of nuclear annihilation. Indeed, many of the world’s greatest thinkers, politicians, and communicators devoted their careers to understanding and reducing the threat — people like Thomas Schelling, Carl Sagan and even, in his later years, Albert Einstein.

        But since the end of the Cold War, the nuclear expert has all but disappeared.

        And that’s a problem.

        It’s a problem because the risk of nuclear war didn’t just disappear with the Cold War.

        In fact, the world is currently facing many nuclear challenges:

        Continue reading →

          #186 – Dean Spears on why babies are born small in Uttar Pradesh, and how to save their lives

          In today’s episode, host Luisa Rodriguez speaks to Dean Spears — associate professor of economics at the University of Texas at Austin and founding director of r.i.c.e. — about his experience implementing a surprisingly low-tech but highly cost-effective kangaroo mother care programme in Uttar Pradesh, India to save the lives of vulnerable newborn infants.

          They cover:

          • The shockingly high neonatal mortality rates in Uttar Pradesh, India, and how social inequality and gender dynamics contribute to poor health outcomes for both mothers and babies.
          • The remarkable benefits for vulnerable newborns that come from skin-to-skin contact and breastfeeding support.
          • The challenges and opportunities that come with working with a government hospital to implement new, evidence-based programmes.
          • How the currently small programme might be scaled up to save more newborns’ lives in other regions of Uttar Pradesh and beyond.
          • How targeted health interventions stack up against direct cash transfers.
          • Plus, a sneak peak into Dean’s new book, which explores the looming global population peak that’s expected around 2080, and the consequences of global depopulation.
          • And much more.

          Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
          Audio engineering lead: Ben Cordell
          Technical editing: Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong
          Additional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa Rodriguez
          Transcriptions: Katy Moore

          Continue reading →

          Particularly impactful career paths you might have overlooked

          The idea this week: there are many potentially high-impact career paths — so don’t limit your options too soon.

          Which careers are best for helping others? It’s a simple-sounding question, but it’s not so simple to answer.

          We’ve written about this question extensively, and it’s a key part of our career guide. We also have a list of the highest-impact career paths our research has found so far.

          Readers naturally focus most on the top of the list. But while we want readers to consider our top-ranked paths (and we think it’s good to be transparent about what we think are the best opportunities to do good), you shouldn’t underrate the personal factors that will make one path or another a better fit for you — both in terms of social impact and personal satisfaction.

          So this week we wanted to highlight a few paths and career steps (in no particular order) that we think people should consider if they want to have a lot of impact:

          1. Journalism

          Public discourse shapes the way societies understand and react to key problems in the world, and journalists have a significant role in shaping it. So if you can become an influential journalist, you might be able to have a big impact by drawing attention to pressing world problems, how to solve them, and how to generally think well about these issues.

          Continue reading →

            #185 – Lewis Bollard on the 7 most promising ways to end factory farming, and whether AI is going to be good or bad for animals

            In today’s episode, host Luisa Rodriguez speaks to Lewis Bollard — director of the Farm Animal Welfare programme at Open Philanthropy — about the promising progress and future interventions to end the worst factory farming practices still around today.

            They cover:

            • The staggering scale of animal suffering in factory farms, and how it will only get worse without intervention.
            • Work to improve farmed animal welfare that Open Philanthropy is excited about funding.
            • The amazing recent progress made in farm animal welfare — including regulatory attention in the EU and a big win at the US Supreme Court — and the work that still needs to be done.
            • The occasional tension between ending factory farming and curbing climate change.
            • How AI could transform factory farming for better or worse — and Lewis’s fears that the technology will just help us maximise cruelty in the name of profit.
            • How Lewis has updated his opinions or grantmaking as a result of new research on the “moral weights” of different species.
            • Lewis’s personal journey working on farm animal welfare, and how he copes with the emotional toll of confronting the scale of animal suffering.
            • How listeners can get involved in the growing movement to end factory farming — from career and volunteer opportunities to impactful donations.
            • And much more.

            Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
            Audio engineering lead: Ben Cordell
            Technical editing: Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong
            Additional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa Rodriguez
            Transcriptions: Katy Moore

            Continue reading →

            #184 – Zvi Mowshowitz on sleeping on sleeper agents, and the biggest AI updates since ChatGPT

            Many of you will have heard of Zvi Mowshowitz as a superhuman information-absorbing-and-processing machine — which he definitely is.

            As the author of the Substack Don’t Worry About the Vase, Zvi has spent as much time as literally anyone in the world over the last two years tracking in detail how the explosion of AI has been playing out — and he has strong opinions about almost every aspect of it. So in today’s episode, host Rob Wiblin asks Zvi for his takes on:

            • US-China negotiations
            • Whether AI progress has stalled
            • The biggest wins and losses for alignment in 2023
            • EU and White House AI regulations
            • Which major AI lab has the best safety strategy
            • The pros and cons of the Pause AI movement
            • Recent breakthroughs in capabilities
            • In what situations it’s morally acceptable to work at AI labs

            Whether you agree or disagree with his views, Zvi is super informed and brimming with concrete details.

            Zvi and Rob also talk about:

            • The risk of AI labs fooling themselves into believing their alignment plans are working when they may not be.
            • The “sleeper agent” issue uncovered in a recent Anthropic paper, and how it shows us how hard alignment actually is.
            • Why Zvi disagrees with 80,000 Hours’ advice about gaining career capital to have a positive impact.
            • Zvi’s project to identify the most strikingly horrible and neglected policy failures in the US, and how Zvi founded a new think tank (Balsa Research) to identify innovative solutions to overthrow the horrible status quo in areas like domestic shipping, environmental reviews, and housing supply.
            • Why Zvi thinks that improving people’s prosperity and housing can make them care more about existential risks like AI.
            • An idea from the online rationality community that Zvi thinks is really underrated and more people should have heard of: simulacra levels.
            • And plenty more.

            Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
            Audio engineering lead: Ben Cordell
            Technical editing: Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong
            Transcriptions: Katy Moore

            Continue reading →

            Christian Ruhl on why we’re entering a new nuclear age — and how to reduce the risks

            In this episode of 80k After Hours, Luisa Rodriguez and Christian Ruhl discuss underrated best bets to avert civilisational collapse from global catastrophic risks — things like great power war, frontier military technologies, and nuclear winter.

            They cover:

            • How the geopolitical situation has changed in recent years into a “three-body problem” between the US, Russia, and China.
            • How adding AI-enabled technologies into the mix makes things even more unstable and unpredictable.
            • Why Christian recommends many philanthropists focus on “right-of-boom” interventions — those that mitigate the damage after a catastrophe — over traditional preventative measures.
            • Concrete things policymakers should be considering to reduce the devastating effects of unthinkable tragedies.
            • And on a more personal note, Christian’s experience of having a stutter.

            Who this episode is for:

            • People interested in the most cost-effective ways to prevent nuclear war, such as:
              • Deescalating after accidental nuclear use.
              • Civil defence and war termination.
              • Mitigating nuclear winter.

            Who this episode isn’t for:

            • People interested in the least cost-effective ways to prevent nuclear war, such as:
              • Coating every nuclear weapon on Earth in solid gold so they’re no longer functional.
              • Creating a TV show called The Real Housewives of Nuclear Winter about the personal and professional lives of women in Beverly Hills after a nuclear holocaust.
              • A multibillion dollar programme to invent a laser beam that could write permanent messages on the Moon, and using it just once to spell out #nonukesnovember.

            Producer: Keiran Harris
            Audio Engineering Lead: Ben Cordell
            Technical editing: Ben Cordell and Milo McGuire
            Content editing: Katy Moore, Luisa Rodriguez, and Keiran Harris
            Transcriptions: Katy Moore

            Gershwin – Rhapsody in Blue, original 1924 version” by Jason Weinberger is licensed under creative commons

            Continue reading →

            Particularly neglected causes you could work on

            The idea this week: working on a highly neglected or pre-paradigmatic issue could be a way to make a big positive difference.

            We usually focus on how people can help tackle what we think are the biggest global catastrophic risks. But there are lots of other pressing problems we think also deserve more attention — some of which are especially highly neglected.

            Compared to our top-ranked issues, these problems generally don’t have well-developed fields dedicated to them. So we don’t have as much concrete advice about how to tackle them, and they might be full of dead ends.

            But if you can find ways to meaningfully contribute (and have the kind of self-directed mindset necessary, doing so could well be your top option.

            Here they are, in no particular order:

            1. Risks of stable totalitarianism

            If we put aside risks of extinction, one of the biggest dangers to the long-term future of humanity might be the potential for an ultra-long-lasting and terrible political regime. As technology advances and globalisation and homogenisation increase, a stable form of totalitarianism potentially could take hold, enabled by improved surveillance, advanced lie detection, or an obedient AI workforce. We’re not sure how big or tractable these risks are, but more research into the area could be highly valuable. Read more.

            2. Long-term focused space governance

            Humanity’s future,

            Continue reading →

              #183 – Spencer Greenberg on causation without correlation, money and happiness, lightgassing, hype vs value, and more

              In today’s episode, host Rob Wiblin speaks for a fourth time with listener favourite Spencer Greenberg — serial entrepreneur and host of the Clearer Thinking podcast — about a grab-bag of topics that Spencer has explored since his last appearance on the show a year ago.

              They cover:

              • How much money makes you happy — and the tricky methodological issues that come up trying to answer that question.
              • The importance of hype in making valuable things happen.
              • How to recognise warning signs that someone is untrustworthy or likely to hurt you.
              • Whether Registered Reports are successfully solving reproducibility issues in science.
              • The personal principles Spencer lives by, and whether or not we should all establish our own list of life principles.
              • The biggest and most harmful systemic mistakes we commit when making decisions, both individually and as groups.
              • The potential harms of lightgassing, which is the opposite of gaslighting.
              • How Spencer’s team used non-statistical methods to test whether astrology works.
              • Whether there’s any social value in retaliation.
              • And much more.

              Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
              Audio Engineering Lead: Ben Cordell
              Technical editing: Simon Monsour, Milo McGuire, and Dominic Armstrong
              Transcriptions: Katy Moore

              Continue reading →

              Expression of interest: Senior product manager

              About 80,000 Hours

              80,000 Hours’ mission is to get talented people working on the world’s most pressing problems.

              Since being founded in 2011, we have helped popularise using your career to ambitiously pursue impact while thinking seriously about cause and intervention prioritisation, as well as grow the fields of AI safety, AI governance, and global catastrophic biological risk reduction, among others.

              Over a million people visit our website each year, and thousands of people have told us that they’ve significantly changed their career plans due to our work. Surveys conducted by our primary funder, Open Philanthropy, show that 80,000 Hours is one of the single biggest drivers of talent moving into work related to reducing global catastrophic risks.

              The role

              As a senior product manager, you would:

              • Research, propose, and implement product innovations to make the 80,000 Hours website more useful and delightful for talented people interested in having a high impact career
                • For example, you could lead on refreshing the site’s visual identity to make it more appealing, or creating and integrating a custom LLM to help users navigate the content.
              • Lead on strategies for gathering and using user feedback and industry research to inform product decisions and assess their success
              • Work with our developers and content team to implement product changes, eventually aiming to manage and hire full-time staff
              • Decide on the metrics we should use to track success and implement systems for doing so
              • Generally help grow the impact of the site

              This is a senior role.

              Continue reading →

                Expression of interest: Writer and writer-researcher

                About 80,000 Hours

                80,000 Hours’ mission is to get talented people working on the world’s most pressing problems. Since being founded in 2011, we have helped:

                • Popularise using your career to ambitiously pursue impact while thinking seriously about cause and intervention prioritisation
                • Grow the fields of AI safety, AI governance, global catastrophic biological risk reduction, and global catastrophic risk reduction capacity building (among others)
                • Fill hundreds of roles at many of the most impactful organisations tackling the worlds’ most pressing problems

                Over a million people visit our website each year, and thousands of people have told us that they’ve significantly changed their career plans due to our work. Surveys conducted by our primary funder, Open Philanthropy, show that 80,000 Hours is one of the single biggest drivers of talent moving into work related to reducing global catastrophic risks.

                Our most popular pieces are read by over 1,000 people each month, and they are among the most important ways we help people shift their careers towards higher-impact options.

                The roles

                We’re listing these roles together because there’s a lot of overlap in what they’ll focus on, and we suspect some of the same candidates could be strong fits for both.

                The main difference is that the writer role focuses more on the craft of writing compelling and informative pieces for the audience, and the writer-researcher role focuses more on supporting the knowledge base that informs the pieces.

                Continue reading →

                  #182 – Bob Fischer on comparing the welfare of humans, chickens, pigs, octopuses, bees, and more

                  In today’s episode, host Luisa Rodriguez speaks to Bob Fischer — senior research manager at Rethink Priorities and the director of the Society for the Study of Ethics and Animals — about Rethink Priorities’s Moral Weight Project.

                  They cover:

                  • The methods used to assess the welfare ranges and capacities for pleasure and pain of chickens, pigs, octopuses, bees, and other animals — and the limitations of that approach.
                  • Concrete examples of how someone might use the estimated moral weights to compare the benefits of animal vs human interventions.
                  • The results that most surprised Bob.
                  • Why the team used a hedonic theory of welfare to inform the project, and what non-hedonic theories of welfare might bring to the table.
                  • Thought experiments like Tortured Tim that test different philosophical assumptions about welfare.
                  • Confronting our own biases when estimating animal mental capacities and moral worth.
                  • The limitations of using neuron counts as a proxy for moral weights.
                  • How different types of risk aversion, like avoiding worst-case scenarios, could impact cause prioritisation.
                  • And plenty more.

                  Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
                  Audio Engineering Lead: Ben Cordell
                  Technical editing: Simon Monsour and Milo McGuire
                  Additional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa Rodriguez
                  Transcriptions: Katy Moore

                  Continue reading →

                  #181 – Laura Deming on the science that could keep us healthy in our 80s and beyond

                  In today’s episode, host Luisa Rodriguez speaks to Laura Deming — founder of The Longevity Fund — about the challenge of ending ageing.

                  They cover:

                  • How lifespan is surprisingly easy to manipulate in animals, which suggests human longevity could be increased too.
                  • Why we irrationally accept age-related health decline as inevitable.
                  • The engineering mindset Laura takes to solving the problem of ageing.
                  • Laura’s thoughts on how ending ageing is primarily a social challenge, not a scientific one.
                  • The recent exciting regulatory breakthrough for an anti-ageing drug for dogs.
                  • Laura’s vision for how increased longevity could positively transform society by giving humans agency over when and how they age.
                  • Why this decade may be the most important decade ever for making progress on anti-ageing research.
                  • The beauty and fascination of biology, which makes it such a compelling field to work in.
                  • And plenty more.

                  Producer and editor: Keiran Harris
                  Audio Engineering Lead: Ben Cordell
                  Technical editing: Simon Monsour and Milo McGuire
                  Additional content editing: Katy Moore and Luisa Rodriguez
                  Transcriptions: Katy Moore

                  Continue reading →

                  The case for taking your technical expertise to the field of AI policy

                  The idea this week: technical expertise is needed in AI governance and policy.

                  How do you prevent a new and rapidly evolving technology from spiralling out of control? How can governments, policymakers, and civil society ensure that we’re making the best decisions about how to integrate artificial intelligence into our society?

                  To answer these kinds of questions, we need people with technical expertise — in machine learning, information security, computing hardware, or other relevant technical domains — to work in AI governance and policy making.

                  Of course, there are roles for people with many different backgrounds to play in AI governance and policy. Experience in law, international coordination, communications, operations management, and more are all potentially valuable in this space.

                  But we think people with technical backgrounds may underrate their ability to contribute to AI policy. We’ve long regarded AI technical safety research as an extremely high-impact career option, and we still do. But this sometimes gives readers the impression that if they’ve got a technical background or aptitude, it’s the main path for them to consider if they want to help prevent an AI-related catastrophe.

                  But this isn’t necessarily true.

                  Technical knowledge is crucial in AI governance for understanding the current landscape and likely trajectories of the technology, as well as for designing and implementing policies that can reduce the biggest risks.

                  Continue reading →