Launched in 2009 in Oxford as a revolution in philanthropy, Effective Altruism appealed to the brightest and the richest and has been the buzzword in Silicon Valley. But the initial idealism has turned into speculation and esotericism.
If you want to help those who suffer, would you let yourself be led by your heart to choose the causes you support or would you accept a more rational calculation so that your impulse would benefit as many people as possible? William MacAskill and Toby Ord, philosophers from Oxford, developed the second option. This way of thinking, in which the cost-benefit calculation and the number of beneficiaries are imposed on feelings, they called Effective Altruism.
It all started in 2009, when MacAskill and Ord created an organization guided by the philosophy of earn to give. Its members pledged to donate 10% of their salary to philanthropic activities. The movement took to elite universities and among Californian techies. The leaders encouraged their followers to take up positions in organizations and to occupy good jobs. Donors were judged not by their behavior but by their ability to benefit as many people as possible. Better an investment banker than a bank employee.
Effective Altruism was a Silicon Valley ethic. A philosophy that solved everything with equations. That allowed them to continue making money and continue to think that only technology solves the problems of this world. The move sparked the interest of Peter Thiel and Elon Musk. And he caught the co-founder of Facebook, Dustin Moskovitz
In 2022 MacAskill published What we owe the future, a book in which he claimed that it is not enough to worry about the living. We had to think about future generations. In the millions of beings who could not be born because of today's mistakes. The idea, known as long-termism, reflected the movement's unusual mutation. The new altruists increasingly despised the problems of the present. The climate crisis or diseases in poor countries became insignificant next to the threats that can lead humanity to extinction. In particular artificial intelligence and biological risks.
But that same year the accident came. The number one believer, the ideal giver, the most famous, starred in a financial scandal that seemed to vindicate critics who feared that the rules of Effective Altruism could lead its members to antisocial behavior.
Sam Bankman-Fried was the son of Stanford law professors, people who didn't take holidays or celebrate birthdays. At age eight, Sam thought Santa Claus was a ridiculous idea. He soon learned that the world could be wrong and only he could be right. He studied at MIT and entered a hedge fund (high frequency trading). He was adept at calculating risks. And he brought these techniques to cryptocurrencies, where he founded FTX.
Bankman-Fried tuned in from day one with MacAskill. And as he confessed to the journalist Michael Lewis, the new philosophy gave meaning to his life, until then empty.
FTX went bankrupt in November 2022. It left an $8 billion hole. Today the financier faces a prison sentence of up to 115 years for fraud and conspiracy in what appeared to be a pyramid scheme. At trial, he was described as an unscrupulous manipulator. But the worst was the suspicion that the philosophy of "earning by giving" could explain his imprudence. Bankman-Fried had funneled billions of dollars into the organization.
Another Sam, Sam Altman, was also born into a family of liberal ideas and had a nerdy childhood. He studied computer science at Stanford. At the age of 19 he started a geolocation company and his talent impressed everyone. When he founded Open AI in 2014 (creator of the artificial intelligence chatbot ChatGPT) he was already a star: “I hate to say it, and it sounds arrogant, but before Open AI, what was the last real breakthrough scientist who came out of a Silicon Valley company?”.
I had read the Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom, predecessor of long-termism. He was never a member of Effective Altruism, but he was surrounded by it. Three Open AI directors had ties to the movement. The non-profit company had been created to minimize the “destructive potential” of artificial intelligence.
But when Altman took a more commercial spin on Open AI a week ago, altruists kicked him out. They felt that he was going too fast and had become a threat. In the end after three days of factional warfare on the board, Altman regained control.
It has been a victory for money over caution. And also a painful defeat for the new altruists in a field in which they have become very influential. The war for control of Open AI has put them in the spotlight. It has revealed his ability to penetrate and the appeal of his ideas, especially among the most powerful people. Bostrom has been a consultant for the CIA and the European Commission. Toby Ord has advised the British government and the WHO and works on risks for the UN.
Effective Altruism is today a well-organized and widespread movement (with groups in Barcelona and Madrid). It has woven a web of research centers and foundations that compete with traditional oenagés in attracting resources. Its members are young (under thirty) idealists, educated and convinced that they will save humanity. Their priority is the beings who have not yet been born and who may do so within thousands of years. Like in a science fiction movie.
