Interview
#24 - Stefan Schubert on why it’s a bad idea to break the rules, even if it’s for a good cause
- The effective altruism movement is expected to mature by shifting from a youth-focused, signaling-oriented dynamic to one emphasizing expertise, specialization, and a reduction in generalist philosophy thinkers at institutions like the Future Humanity Institute.
- Future development may involve "creative destruction" where ineffective projects persist longer than in market economies due to less visible negative impacts, potentially preventing the rapid shutdown of old approaches or the breakup of dominant organizations that could evolve into monopolies.
- New organization formation faces headwinds, with fewer startups predicted than initially forecasted as it becomes increasingly difficult for new entrants to compete with established entities like 80,000 Hours, particularly in the developing world where perceived barriers to scaling may deter founders.
- Strategic focus is likely to remain narrow on high-impact areas such as existential risk rather than expanding widely, driven by the expectation that impact distribution will remain highly uneven despite deep uncertainty that limits confidence to roughly 80% for complex future questions.
- Risks include the community becoming too tribal through political involvement, failing to provide abrasive but necessary feedback to preserve long-term interests, or becoming overconfident in current cause prioritization to the point of ignoring unknown, potentially superior causes.
- Internal challenges involve the potential difficulty of communicating strategic pivots, such as shifting from "earning to give" to addressing talent gaps, which may take years to permeate the public consciousness, and the need to establish distinct epistemic norms superior to mainstream standards while maintaining conventional social interactions.