EA Forum Podcast (All audio)

EA Forum Team
  • 0.0 (0)
  • TECHNOLOGY
  • UPDATED DAILY

Audio narrations from the Effective Altruism Forum, including curated posts, posts with 30 karma, and other great writing. If you'd like fewer episodes, subscribe to the "EA Forum (Curated & Popular)" podcast instead.

  1. 10H AGO

    “Electrical stunning does not yet ensure prolonged insensibility in several European finfish species” by Rethink Priorities, samaramendez, Sagar K Shah

    This post is a summary of our literature review of seabream, seabass, and small rainbow trout electrical stunning studies, which you can find on RP's website. It was cross-posted from our Substack. Rainbow trout, gilthead seabream, and European seabass are the top three most farmed fish species in Europe, by number of individual fish. We estimate that ~400 million gilthead seabream, ~200 million European seabass, and ~200 million small rainbow trout were slaughtered for European consumption in 2021. Current standard slaughter methods for these Mediterranean species, mainly asphyxia in air or ice slurry, are widely considered inhumane due to the prolonged suffering they induce. Major retailers and producers (1, 2) have made commitments to transition to electrical stunning methods by 2027–2028. Additionally, leading aquaculture certification bodies are updating their standards to mandate these practices, encouraging industry-wide adoption within the next few years. The problem While electrical stunning has gained rapid policy and commercial acceptance with reported operational benefits, the scientific evidence for whether it actually achieves humane outcomes for these species is surprisingly sparse. Humane stunning means rendering fish immediately insensible and keeping them that way until death. In practice, achieving this standard - and confirming that achievement [...] --- Outline: (01:20) The problem (02:53) What we did (03:38) Our results (05:10) Finding 1: Electrical stunning remains unproven for seabream and seabass (05:57) Finding 2: Electric stunning may be more promising for rainbow trout (06:56) Finding 3: Thin evidence means our findings are more speculative than we would like (08:21) Implications of our findings (08:25) Electrical stunners could improve rainbow trout welfare (09:27) More research is needed on stunner performance in commercial settings (10:24) Our recommendations on how to advance fish welfare at the time of slaughter (12:48) Acknowledgements --- First published: March 12th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Y2pEQKcWmDisXtxfs/electrical-stunning-does-not-yet-ensure-prolonged --- 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.

    13 min

  2. 15H AGO

    “Incoming money, integrity, and collective action problems” by ElliotTep

    EA has been an unusually high-trust community. This has pros and cons. That trust comes with a lot of what makes EA great: people are unusually likely to help each other if they think it will be good overall, reports can discuss with managers whether they should leave for another job, and grantees can be unusually frank with grantmakers. As discussions grow on the forum about Anthropic employees potentially donating large amounts of equity to EA charities, I want to discuss below a few risks I worry about: A collective action problem of everyone pitching Anthropic staff directly. Engaging in dishonest or disingenuous behaviour to better fundraise. Avoiding both these issues matters for two reasons. First, Anthropic staff deserve to be treated with honesty and respect. Second, I think it's good for impact for several reasons, including the value of trust and transparency in maintaining donations over many years. Collective Action Problem 1. Pitching directly Individual orgs and fundraisers each have rational incentives to pitch Anthropic employees directly. From any single org's perspective, reaching out once seems fine. But when there are hundreds of orgs potentially worthy of donations, if pitching a donor directly gets you an edge [...] --- Outline: (01:10) Collective Action Problem 1. Pitching directly (02:29) Collective Action Problem 2. Dishonesty (04:43) My recommendations for high-integrity fundraising: --- First published: March 12th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Gmf5qaW3wKtuPbjCS/incoming-money-integrity-and-collective-action-problems --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

    6 min

  3. 15H AGO

    “Make Cruelty Unprofitable Again” by LewisBollard

    Note: This post was crossposted from the Coefficient Giving Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post. Subtitle: How to crack the cruelty collective action problem Last month, eight large UK fast food chains — including KFC, Nando's, and Burger King — scrapped their pledges to adopt higher-welfare chicken standards under the Better Chicken Commitment. They blamed supply shortages, demand shocks, even the climate impact of the promised reforms. But suppose the reforms had been profitable. Does anyone really think these chains would have found those obstacles insurmountable? The reasons were rationalizations, not motivations. Most cruelty to farm animals today persists for one simple reason: it is profitable. That logic explains far more than the press releases do. The familiar arguments about why cages are “necessary,” mutilations are “for the animals’ benefit,” and slower-growing breeds are “impractical” speak more to the creativity of PR firms than the realities of reform. It wasn’t always this way — and it need not always be. The agricultural industrial revolution trapped farming in a cruelty collective action problem. How can we solve it? When cruelty didn’t [...] --- First published: March 12th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/2fZwHSua53d2LekNy/make-cruelty-unprofitable-again --- 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.

    11 min

  4. 1D AGO

    “Your outreach is written for people who already agree with you” by Anna Pitner

    A few months ago I was talking to a software engineer at Google. On paper, a dream job. But she was frustrated. She felt like she wasn't contributing enough to the world and was seriously considering putting her engineering career aside to go study psychology. A whole decade-long academic track, starting from scratch. I told her there are actually many ways to create a massive impact with exactly the technical background she already has. So I sent her to read about it on the EA websites. She landed on a page about longtermism and existential risk reduction. She couldn't understand why any of it was relevant to her. Here was someone with the exact profile EA says it wants to reach: technically skilled, motivated by impact, ready to act. And we opened with the most abstract, most philosophically demanding version of the pitch before she'd even encountered the basic idea that some career paths do far more good than others. She wasn't wrong to bounce. The content wasn't written for her. It was written for someone who'd already bought the premise. I think this is EA's core growth problem. Not the ideas. The ideas are exceptional. The problem is [...] --- Outline: (01:59) The bridge problem (03:45) The sequencing problem (05:32) What a better bridge looks like --- First published: March 11th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Sipns4oezBLzKagCj/your-outreach-is-written-for-people-who-already-agree-with --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

    8 min

  5. 1D AGO

    “GiveWell’s 2025 Grantmaking: Record Grants, Expanded Reach, Crisis Response” by GiveWell

    This post was originally published on the GiveWell blog. You can view the original version here. In our 2025 grantmaking year, GiveWell approved $418 million in grants to highly cost-effective programs in order to save and improve lives as much as we can. Through years of deliberate groundwork, we’ve been growing our research capacity and scope in order to direct substantially more funding to the most impactful opportunities we can find. Last year's grantmaking reflects this growth, and we will be continuing an intensive effort this year to scale our ability to partner with donors to help people in need. Between February 1, 2025, and January 31, 2026, GiveWell approved 131 grants to 69 organizations—the most grants we’ve made in a year so far. This post provides an overview of the kinds of grants we made and the impact we had last year. This was only possible thanks to the generosity of our donors. We’re incredibly grateful for the trust you place in our research and for your partnership in trying to do the most good we can together. Increased Grantmaking In 2025, we launched more than 200 formal grant investigations, after reviewing many additional promising opportunities. Tens of [...] --- Outline: (01:21) Increased Grantmaking (02:02) Double Our Cost-Effectiveness Threshold (02:44) Expanded Cause Areas and Reach (04:19) Urgent Response to Aid Cuts (05:33) Continuing Our Growth in 2026 and Beyond --- First published: March 11th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/sruWKjiNrypj4brnL/givewell-s-2025-grantmaking-record-grants-expanded-reach-1 --- 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.

    7 min

  6. 1D AGO

    “We do not live by course alone” by Joe Rogero

    In my occasional advising calls with aspiring AI Safety folks, one of the most common questions I get is “What courses should I take next?” I often find myself replying: “None; go do stuff instead.” Fabricando fit faber. By making, one becomes a maker. There are a lot of courses in AI safety and governance. I’ve helped teach a few. Some are quite good! But after the tenth or twentieth person tells me “I’ve read If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies and taken BlueDot's AGI Strategy and the CAIS AI Safety course, I’m not sure whether I should do ARENA or apply to MATS…” I start to notice a pattern. I want to take them by the shoulders and say “THOSE ARE NOT YOUR ONLY CHOICES.” Look. MATS is pretty cool. Many of their graduates do good work. It's also, AFAIK, swamped with promising applicants and eager young ML engineers. If you think MATS sounds like a good fit for you, sure, you should probably apply. And then, while your keyboard is still cooling from the red-hot fire of your earnest expression of interest, you should turn that incandescent determination towards something you can do [...] --- First published: March 11th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/AWzcocxYTRBtxWA8b/we-do-not-live-by-course-alone --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

    4 min

  7. 2D AGO

    “What I didn’t expect about being a funder” by JamesÖz 🔸

    Crossposted from my blog I am very fortunate to have my job in many ways – I get to talk to, learn from, and give money to amazing people and nonprofits all around the world. I get to allocate a modest amount of resources to incredible organisations that I think are doing some of the best work to improve the world. I don’t have to fundraise for my or my team's salaries anymore. However, there are some things I’ve learned since becoming a philanthropic grantmaker that were either surprising or affected me more strongly than I expected. I will outline some of these below. These are not meant to invoke feelings of “oh poor grantmakers who have access to money and influence” but rather “oh, I never considered things from that perspective”. Hopefully, they will also lead to more productive working relationships between funders and advocacy groups. Here, I discuss: How challenging the trade-offs are that funders face The extremely poor feedback mechanisms that nonprofits have How people treat you differently once you have access to funding, and how that changes you The weight of saying no to good groups Some things that make me feel cynical Trade-offs [...] --- Outline: (01:18) Trade-offs are hard and money is scarce (06:35) Nonprofits have bad feedback mechanisms (13:00) How people treat you differently (and how that changes you) (14:52) Its hard to say no to people (16:08) Its easy to become cynical (19:38) Wrapping up --- First published: March 11th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/umicYzuRsm6okFRKA/what-i-didn-t-expect-about-being-a-funder --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

    21 min

  8. 2D AGO

    “New Video: If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies” by ChanaMessinger

    If you just want a link to the video, watch it here! What's AI in Context? AI in Context is 80,000 Hours’ Video Program's YouTube channel, hosted by Aric Floyd. We’re trying to do high production documentary storytelling about transformative AI and its risks. You can see our retrospective on our first two videos here. Why this topic? We loved making our first two videos. We’re Not Ready for Superintelligence recently crossed 10M views, and our video about MechaHitler crossed 3M. But when we reflected, we felt like we’d been circling around the central message we wanted to share. The specific AI 2027 scenario is really interesting, and the MechaHitler story is illuminating, but we wanted to make sure that at least once, we’d gone through the whole argument, or at least one whole argument, for being concerned about existential risk via loss of control over AI. Honestly, that made it really convenient that Nate Soares and Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies. If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies Nate and Eliezer have thought about this issue for a long time – especially Eliezer, who was debating the Singularity via mailing list around when Aric was [...] --- Outline: (00:26) Whats AI in Context? (00:47) Why this topic? (01:30) If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies (02:59) Heres what were going for: (04:43) Subscribing and sharing (05:08) Team Update and Logistics (05:50) Thanks so much! --- First published: March 10th, 2026 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/iGBTzbZFseNtDEd3n/new-video-if-anyone-builds-it-everyone-dies --- 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.

    7 min
See All (250)

About

Audio narrations from the Effective Altruism Forum, including curated posts, posts with 30 karma, and other great writing. If you'd like fewer episodes, subscribe to the "EA Forum (Curated & Popular)" podcast instead.

Information

  • Creator
    EA Forum Team
  • Years Active
    2023 - 2026
  • Episodes
    250
  • Rating
    Clean
  • Copyright
    © 2026 All rights reserved
  • Show Website
    EA Forum Podcast (All audio)

You Might Also Like