Hi EA friends,

In light of the recent ban on cultivated meat (CM) in Florida, I think we should discuss this topic!

Below is my testimony at the FL Senate against the ban of CM.
https://youtu.be/ebkVjedOzGg?si=I8t7EpOKMzOQwmw5

My testimony might have helped to allow CM research for space research at least... . This article came out today that cites my testimony.

I know that most EAs support alt protein. But sometimes I hear concerns about cultivated meat, for instance, regarding harming animals during sample collection or using animal products such as serum during cell culture.

So as a cultivated meat scientist, I'm writing this to share some thoughts and hopefully give you some talking points, even if you already support cultivated meat.

In addition, I know that many of you guys are computer and AI nerds! In the last paragraph, I will discuss a few ways YOU can contribute to food system transformation and why it would be one of the most impactful things you can do :)

First things first, I'm a biomedical scientist (who studied top causes of death and pandemics) turned food system scientist. I have my own 501(c)(3) nonprofit, Allied Scholars for Animal Protection (ASAP). We are funded by philanthropy, EA, and people like yourself, and we focus on training the next generation of leaders to drive major systemic changes in food transformation! My goal is to create more influential people like Bruce Friedrich, Mayor Eric Adams,

I'm also the Cultivated Meat Senior Scientist at the Good Food Institute. Here, we promote alternative proteins, including plant-based proteins and CM. We don't sell any products; supported by philanthropy, we help transition the food system toward a sustainable and ethical model.
I'm also an adviser/mentor at Effective Thesis.

The reason I say working on the food system and promoting veganism is one of the most urgent and impactful causes is because it's one of the largest sources of suffering, and yet one of the most neglected ones! Many scientists talk about climate, pandemics, chronic diseases, antibiotic resistance, etc. but no one wants to address the elephant in the room: the food! It's always neglected, and IMHO it also doesn't get the attention in deserves in EA (tho I see improvements!). EA itself identifies climate and pandemics and major threats, which are directly linked to animal consumption.

Personally, I have no desire to try CM. Like many other vegans, I've lost the taste for flesh. But CM isn't really for vegans.

I know some people dislike the idea. However, as a scientist, I want to share my thoughts so people can make a well-informed judgment.

I fully acknowledge that CM may not be a perfect solution. The idea that the cells originate from animals also bothers me.

However, it's important to know that the cells can be collected from a feather, an egg, a blood sample, a small biopsy, or from the meat of an animal who was unfortunately killed for meat.
Another concern is the use of serum in cell culture. If you're unaware, the process of obtaining Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS) is extremely cruel.

But that's an additional reason to support CM.

Because of CM, most companies are developing animal-free alternatives. Indeed, it wouldn't be possible to scale up CM using animal-based serum. Once the animal-free serum is commercially available, it could hopefully replace the massive amounts of serum used in biomedical research and biopharma.

Another misconception I'd like to address is that once a company establishes a cell line and produces a product, they would never revert to using animals again. Indeed, the original cells are propagated in incubators and frozen. Each time a company starts a new batch, a tiny vial is taken from the cell bank (giant freezers powered by liquid nitrogen), and the cultivation process begins anew.

So, you'd never need to go back to the original animal. This would not be feasible due to regulatory limitations, even if a company wanted to, unless they were willing to go through years of painful and expensive regulatory approval.
The reason I think we should give CM a chance and support it is that when it reaches price parity, it can replace a lot of meat from slaughtered animals, sparing the lives of many.

Cultivated chicken and fish have the potential to save trillions of animals!

I think that places like KFC, Chick-fil-A, McDonald's, etc. don't really care about animal cruelty or consumers. They just want to make a profit. If they can make profit without killing and torturing billions of animals, I think that's a step in the right direction!

I also believe that tasty and healthful plant-based options are already available. We should continue to promote them.

CM will help many people who won't go vegan to at least not pay for animal slaughter and abuse constantly. CM can also be used to produce meat for pets. A large number of animals are killed just for pet food.

In my humble opinion, CM is not the ideal and perfect solution, but it's one of the best options we have.
The food system that relies on animal products is inherently unsustainable and needs to change. Nobody knows what the solution will be. Will it be plant-based foods? CM? Or a combination?

Currently, CM is being sold in very few restaurants worldwide, and this has already alarmed the meat and dairy industries.

I mention dairy because a lot of meat comes from the dairy industry, as dry mother cows and their male calves are killed on dairy farms.

The fact that the animal industry is so afraid of CM suggests that CM has a real chance to revolutionize the food system.

I don't have all the answers, but I do know one thing: Our food system is broken. It causes immense suffering to both human and non-human animals, from unimaginable cruelty in meat, egg, and dairy farms, to pandemics, antibiotic resistance, pollution, toxic chemicals, habitat loss, deforestation, climate change, and much more.

I know that to change this broken system, and the most normalized form of cruelty, we need to work together and use anything in our power to speak up and promote the change we want to see.

When I was in FL, senators' offices were packed by cowboys and folks from FL Cattleman Association. They were heavily lobbying against anything that would impact their business, and their businesses are fundamentally based on exploiting and killing animals for meat, egg, and dairy.

This is why at my nonprofit, ASAP, I focus on training the next generation of influential, kind, compassionate, determined, and hardworking vegan leaders. I help students to use their background, whether it's philosophy, CS, STEM, law, medicine, etc., to tackle the food system and understand its urgency!

Lastly, if you are a computer nerd, aside from donations, you can directly work on simulation, modeling, and automation of alt protein production processes. See Cultivated Meat Modeling Consortium. Modeling bioprocesses and bioreactors is one of the most important aspects of scaling cultivated meat production. Also see this article by Max Taylor about using AI in Alt Protein development.

Thanks for reading my big essay and let me know what you think. If I can be of any help, especially regarding effective careers, please send me an email through our website or social media. I'm always happy to help.
(And thank you to many of you who already support ASAP/GFI).

Many leading scientists are worried that AI could be an existential risk to humanity. The AI Safety Summits, taking place this time in Seoul, South Korea, aim to reduce risks from AI together with industry and 28 leading AI countries plus the EU.

Unfortunately, these summits are behind closed doors, meaning citizens cannot verify how AI risks, which impose existential risks upon them, are being reduced. Therefore, our AI Safety Summit Talks are open to the general public, policymakers, and journalists. At our events, we discuss what the largest risks of future AI are and how to reduce them.

We think that by increasing existential risk awareness with events such as this one, we increase the likeliness that risk-reducing regulation will get accepted, and we also increase existential risk research funding, priority, diversity, and robustness.

Our speakers for this edition are:

Keynote:

Yoshua Bengio is professor at the University of Montreal (MILA institute). He is recipient of the Turing Award and generally considered one of the fathers of AI. He is also globally the second-most cited AI scientist.

Panel:

Jaan Tallinn is cofounder of Skype, CSER, and FLI, investor in DeepMind and Anthropic, and a leading voice in AI Safety.
Holly Elmore is AI activist and Executive Director of PauseAI US. She holds a PhD in Organismic & Evolutionary Biology from Harvard University.
Stijn Bronzwaer is AI and technology journalist at leading Dutch newspaper NRC Handelsblad. He co-authored a best-selling book on Booking and is recipient of investigative journalism award De Loep.
Will Henshall is editorial fellow at TIME Magazine. He covers tech, with a focus on AI. One recent piece he wrote details big tech lobbying on AI in Washington DC.
Arjun Ramani writes for The Economist about economics and technology. His writings on AI include a piece on what humans might do in a world of superintelligence.

David Wood, chair of the London Futurists, will be our moderator.

We are looking forward to welcoming you!

Time: 21 May 20:00-21:30 Korea time, 13:00-14:30 CET, 12:00-13:30 UK, 7:00-8:30 ET

Register here: https://lu.ma/1ex04fuw (free)

Twitter thread that summarizes the key results:
https://x.com/juddrosenblatt/status/1786554290976489805

Post link (EA forum crosspost not up yet unfortunately):

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XTdByFM6cmgB3taEN/key-takeaways-from-our-ea-and-alignment-research-surveys

Last month, ~AE Studio~ launched two surveys: ~one~ for alignment researchers, and ~another~ for the broader EA community. 

We got some surprisingly interesting results, and we're excited to share them here.

We set out to better explore and compare various population-level dynamics within and across both groups. We examined everything from demographics and personality traits to community views on specific EA/alignment-related topics. We took on this project because it seemed to be largely unexplored and rife with potentially-very-high-value insights. In this post, we’ll present what we think are the most important findings from this project.

Meanwhile, we’re also sharing and publicly releasing a ~tool~ we built for analyzing both datasets. The tool has some handy features, including customizable filtering of the datasets, distribution comparisons within and across the datasets, automatic classification/regression experiments, LLM-powered custom queries, and more. We’re excited for the wider community to use the tool to explore these questions further in whatever manner they desire. There are many open questions we haven’t tackled here related to the current psychological and intellectual make-up of both communities that we hope others will leverage the dataset to explore further.

(Note: if you want to see all results, navigate to the ~tool~, select the analysis type of interest, and click ‘Select All.’ If you have additional questions not covered by the existing analyses, the GPT-4 integration at the bottom of the page should ideally help answer them. The code running the tool and the raw anonymized data are both also publicly available.)

We incentivized participation by offering to donate $40 per eligible[1] respondent—strong participation in both surveys enabled us to donate over $10,000 to both AI safety orgs as well as a number of ~different~ high impact organizations (see here[2] for the exact breakdown across the two surveys). Thanks again to all of those who participated in both surveys!

I'm wondering about this, because in history, wherever there was a strong moralizing tendency in society, or strong ideology, it tended to infringe on people's freedoms.

If everything people do is evaluated based on its contribution to aggregate good it could lead to uniformization of lifestyles (loss of diversity), proliferation of rules and restrictions, ideologization of arts and culture, like in communist countries where each artwork was supposed to spread the ideas about the revolution and communist ideals. This had, as a consequence, a lot of censorship, and also it had detrimental effects on creativity, artistic freedoms, and ultimately on both quantity and quality of artistic output in countries where communism reigned.

I'm wondering if we could expect to see the same problems if you replaced "communism" with "utilitarianism" or "effective altruism"?

Also, if a philosophy determined what we should do (like utilitarianism does), would it nullify our freedom? And then, loss of freedom (which constitutes one of the greatest values, at least in the Western world), could be seen as a disaster even from utilitarian point of view, because unfree people aren't happy people, and if your goal is to produce happiness, removal of freedom will be bad, even in utilitarian framework?

EDIT: Or we'll perhaps use something like soma from Brave New World to keep people happy even if they aren't free?

I certainly hope this will not be the case.

Any thoughts?

With that vague a description, probably not. was hoping to revisit it.

Someone told me that your beliefs changed on somethings [if you can even be treated as a homogeneous group]. Have you dropped your belief in people increasing their income so they can donate more? Is there now a crowd who thinks AI is so important that we should stop giving money to global relief? If so, how common [rare, some, most, almost all]?

I wanted to share a few things that have worked well for me that you could consider in your own workplaces to generate more effective charitable donations.

1. Take advantage of existing corporate charity benefits. Some companies do matched giving when you do sponsored events such as runs or walks. Some will match personal donations or other fundraising events.

2. (UK) Make donations in tax efficient ways including give as you earn so that donations come off your gross income.

3. Run a bake sale in your office. You can turn £10 of ingredients into 40 biscuits that sell for £40. If your company matches donations that’s £80. If you get 8 other people to bake 20 biscuits/cupcakes/brownies each that would be another £160 or £320 matched. Do that 4 x a year and that is a life saved.

4. Get on the social committee and add a charity element to certain socials. For example at the Christmas party do a charity auction where the directors/partners donate some things or services (a weekend stay at their holiday home, use of their office for the day, tickets to a musical /football etc) and then auction them off at the Christmas party with proceeds going to charity.

5. Also connected to the social committee, organise a company or department wide pub quiz and charge an entry fee that goes to charity.

6. If your company already does charity weeks or has a partner charity, try and get on the committee that manages it and redirect efforts to make them more effective. Often funds will go to a domestic charity. You could suggest splitting funds amongst 3 instead: a local charity, a national charity and a global charity. Then get the global charity to be EA aligned while your colleagues argue over the national and local choice.

I’d love to hear from others who are using their company positions to increase effective charitable giving and any tips they’d recommend.

What would happen if a superintelligent AI was aligned with your values?

Here's a scenario* I imagine if it was aligned with my values.

I imagine a pig in a factory farm, screaming as she is lowered into the gas chamber.

I imagine suddenly, the gears stop moving.

Suddenly, through something that looks like magic to us and to a pig, but is no more magic than the internet is, she is in a grass field with her babies. She’s in the perfect environment for pigs, whatever that is.

The pig, for the first time in her life, is safe and happy and free.

I imagine a North Korean woman being beaten by the guards of her prison camp, trying to protect her belly in the likely chance she’s pregnant from the repeated rapes from these very same prison guards.

I imagine suddenly, the beatings stop.

She looks up, and through something that seems as magic to her as electricity seems magic to a cat, she is home.

Her family is there and they hug and cry. For the first time since she was disappeared in the middle of the night, she is safe and happy and free.

I imagine this happening everywhere.

For all of the immense suffering in this world.

For every big, gnarly, seemingly impossible problem in this world.

I imagine something far smarter than I could ever be.

I imagine something far more good than I could ever be.

Going around solving it in a way that, when I look at it, fills me with the deepest joy I can imagine.

I imagine the AI showing itself to me in a form I would find the most inspiring and telling me “You helped make this happen.

You took action.

And one of those actions was really important for making this happen

So many terrible outcomes could have happened, but because you and others did something about it, now we’re here.

So, what would you like to do, now that you can do pretty much whatever you want?”

And she’ll smile, because she’ll already know what I want to do.

And then she’ll give me my paradise.

I’ll spend the next few decades just seeing all of the happy people.

I’ll see what their lives were like before, and I’ll watch the transformations. (Recordings, with no sentience repeating the suffering)

I’ll see the end of torture.

I’ll see the end of abuse.

I’ll see the end of war.

I’ll see the end of hunger.

I’ll see the end of illness.

I’ll see the beginnings of love.

Of joy

Of awe

Of adventure

Of freedom.

I will just bask in all of the happiness.

In all of the suffering averted.

I don’t know how long I’ll do it for.

Years? Decades?

I don’t know.

But I will bask.

And after?

I don’t even know.

I haven’t gotten that far. I’ll figure it out when we get there.

But for now - let’s just try to make sure we get there.

Cause this future is one worth fighting for.

* (Usual caveat: any specific scenario is unlikely, but it can be helpful to imagine scenarios anyways. We need to balance our goals of what we're avoiding with a vision of what we want)

Maybe it’s not the EA community’s fault. Maybe it’s just my mental health problems. I know a lot (probably most) of you don’t think this way. But I’m posting this in the hopes that it will save someone from becoming like me.

Please, please consider reducing and working actively against the practice of using and fear and guilt based tactics to attract people to EA. I am talking about stuff like Peter Singer’s drowning child, which has led me to a mental health crisis that has forced me to put my education on hold, reduced my productivity to near zero, and made me seriously feel like life isn’t worth living and I am a horrible child killer by neglect. I feel like if it weren’t for tactics these, I’d be excited about helping out effectively; instead, I’m having difficulty enjoying anything in life, dealing with incredible guilt nearly constantly, and experiencing great self hatred. I’m hoping therapy and maybe medication will help, but I honestly feel like it’s hopeless and I’ll never be happy again… so scary. I realize this isn’t the fault of EA but I just hope someone else can be helped by this…

Please focus on promoting a sustainable EA lifestyle, not “do as much as possible.” Please find ways to justify self care and having fun that are compelling arguments. Please encourage mental health care for EA community members and everyone.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, the good I could potentially contribute to the world has been extremely reduced by the depression caused by these ideals of perfection, not being able to justify anything, and “you’re responsible for child death while you sit there drinking your Starbucks, you evil person” type arguments. So there’s your argument for why what I’m saying has merit.

Sorry if this was a dumb post. Thanks for reading. If you can come up with any reason why I’m justified to enjoy anything in life and not evil because I could be saving lives instead, please tell me…

PauseAI is protesting just a week before the next AI Safety Summit to convince the attendees to work towards a global halt on the development of cutting-edge AI models.

I'm sure everyone here knows how dangerous frontier models could be and the lack of good enough procedures that exists to ensure they don't develop powerseeking behaviour. A moratorium then, seems like the most sensible action to take right now, and you're welcome to join us in that ask at any of the protest locations and share the event with anyone who may be interested!

https://preview.redd.it/t4ixcidsp2yc1.jpg?width=420&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1446a2fd6f0bd2f8303b948a8d7c41a962d917c4

Fill out a brief survey once a week to help researchers at Uni of Newcastle track influenza and other respiratory diseases: https://www.flutracking.net/Join/AE/inv2024

To EAs that have been in the field for long and who do something impactful on a daily basis: have you seen your criteria for friends changing and how to be OK with accepting people around you who are not impactful despite being aware of suffering?

I have upped my engagement in EA and all the things I used to just do, I do them consciously: asking myself if it's the right thing to do instead of just doing. I don't want to put myself as superior, but it's very hard in my heart to see how people around me are aware of the suffering and yet do nothing, because they 'prefer being happy'. They want nice stuff they want to work where they want because it feels nice, while still lamenting at the state of the world. Once you take action it's hard to accept that others don't...

And it's not just that. They won't talk about impact related things, will be very passive when other people who care about their opinion could hear them if they dared saying something but they don't even try. I don't know, many of my friend seem very self-absorbed and individualistic now that I talk to them. They talk about nothing consistent, don't question their diet..

I don't know. Abandoning them feels like abandoning a part of myself and making new friends with the same standards is so hard. How do you deal with that? Any advice?

I would like to be understanding like Buddha and expect nothing of them but it just feels uninspiring and selfish when with them. Again this is not a brag, I genuinely feel heartbroken about being more and more lonely. I just can't turn off what I feel.

Hi, I’m 18 and I’ve known about Effective Altruism for a few months now but haven’t been one as I haven’t had my own income but I want to be so I’m going to start working soon but I need some help knowing which charities I should donate too and I wanted to ask if which charities we donate too ever change for example the Isreal / Palestine war, is that a main focus or are malaria nets / water etc still the top priority if those are, I’m not sure. I also wanted to know how far you go with it, I’ve heard of the 10% of income giving what we can charity if I remember it correctly but are there any of you that take it at it’s most extreme form for example only using money for food, water, shelter and basic helath needs then everything else goes to charity and if so what is that like living that way. I suppose also if there’s just anything that you could tell me that I should know or that will help I’d appreciate it. Thank you in advance, hope you’re all doing well.

I think I’m not alone when I say that I would like to believe the Effective Altruism community is a fair and public forum for discussion. While many of us may be skeptical of the free market of ideas, we still try to maintain a healthy market of ideas within these spaces. Assuming that everyone is on a level playing field, we generally work to assume good faith. That everyone is playing fairly, and simply trying to get to the truth, even if we disagree.

We are no longer on a level playing field.

All over the internet, including on Reddit, and yes even quite actively on the EA subreddit, there are people who have been explicitly trained to fool you. They flood the internet in droves, flagging content that opposes their political interests and systematically challenging it using propagandizing techniques taught to them for this explicit purpose. No, this is not some insane conspiracy. This is established and demonstrable fact.

I introduce you to so called “Hasbara,” codified Israeli propaganda techniques meant to convince people regardless of truth. Essentially, fully intentional bad faith discussion meant to convince the masses irregardless of the ethics or truthfulness of the methods.

But don’t get bogged down by weird phrases and words. All these complex and ever-changing definitions and proper nouns is specifically designed to sew confusion, and make people go “uhh, you know, I don’t get it so I won’t form an opinion.” Just call it what it is: Propaganda.

Still, even propaganda can be neutral. After all, simply expressing views you believe is propaganda if your goal is to cause political change. But these people are actively working in bad faith, using tactics such as shaming through accusations of antisemitism (they will resort to this without fail when they are losing an argument), whataboutism, feigning neutrality, “just asking questions,” abusing plausible deniability and many more tactics designed to abuse good will with no respect for fair and neutral discussion. Numerous individuals are quite literally sent to schools to learn how to argue on the internet in favor of Israel. It is premeditated and intentional sophistry, plain and simple.

Now you may be thinking, don’t all countries engage in some amount of propaganda? Sure! But this is nowhere near on the level that the Israeli government has gone to manipulate especially American opinions. Palestine is a god damn back water. It barely has the money and resources to defend itself, let alone engage in complex propaganda. Israel’s GDP is nearly 30x that of Palestine. All of the amplifying of Palestinian voices you see comes from one place: Academia. People who have dedicated their lives to finding the truth. Scientists, engineers, journalists and more. And despite concerted efforts by the Israeli lobby to influence academic opinion, academia still overwhelmingly supports Palestine, because the evidence consistently points to Israel committing atrocities agains the Palestinian people, with numerous organizations even going so far as to show dire concern for or even straight up assert ongoing genocide. Academics live in fear of losing their funding or jobs for speaking out against Israel, and yet still those of good conscience and moral fiber stand. Mass firings at Google and arrests being made in colleges across the country are evidence of just how deep this affront to the truth goes.

Any sense that this is a “two sides” issue is a farce. Yes, the question of whether the establishment of Israel was right and whether Israel should exist is complex. But that is not what this is about. The vast majority of those on campuses protesting support a 2-state solution. This is about Israeli propagandists using this argument to attempt to justify the horrible things their government is doing to people they have power over, pushing a religious extremist ideology of colonization, often times with those doing it not even realizing it (more on that later). This is not some confusing, morally gray issue. People are being murdered and driven from their homes, and the US government is heavily funding it. There is no academically credible debate on whether the Israeli government is doing something horrible. There is only the truth as described by the real evidence, and copious amounts of propaganda and misinformation funded by the Israeli government. And occasionally some Palestinians manage to throw some of their own bullshit in there too, but there is no way in hell they would ever be able to compete with the massive amounts of money being funneled into these efforts by Israel. The vast majority of pro-Palestinian content you will see will have its origins in academia.

Understand that the Israeli people and Jews around the world are also victims in all this. The Israeli people have been exposed to massive amounts of propaganda designed to provoke fear and paranoia. Religious radicals in the Israeli government are taking advantage of the generational trauma from the long history of Jewish persecution to make Jews around the world believe that they are fighting a war which, if lost, will result in another holocaust. This is why so many people are willing to lie and manipulate. Most Israeli citizens are also in favor of a two-state solution, but have been mislead about the ongoing expansion into Palestine. Hamas, the radical terrorist group which was born from the persecution of the Palestinian people, was a predictable and likely desired outcome for the Israeli elite, who could use them as a means to stoke this fear. There is no way that those in power in Palestine did not know history well enough to know that something like Hamas would appear. They are not a surprise, they are a strategic part of the plan of religious extremists who wish to occupy the remainder of Palestine, but know that Jews around the world would never stand for such an atrocity. The lives of Israeli people lost at the hands of Hamas are, ironically, blood on the hands of the elite sacrificing their own people to bring about a prophecy from god.

The use of “Zionism” and “Anti-Zionism” terminology has been of particular use to Israeli propagandizing of both the west, and their own people. In the west, anti-Zionism is mostly made up of those who support a two-state solution, and see the ongoing settlement of Palestinian land beyond those borders initially laid out upon Israel’s founding. However, to the Israeli people, Zionism is the belief in having Israel exist at all, and so the “anti-Zionist” is someone who wishes to force them out of their homes and to destroy Israel entirely. This mismatch of definitions allows the Israeli elite to paint a picture of an outside world which seeks to destroy them. If one goes to Israel, one finds not a world of religious extremists who want to genocide the Palestinian people, but largely a well meaning community which is simply terrified of repeating the past.

I want to say that these people aren’t our enemies, because they are victims as well. But as long as they act as tools of a machine of untruth, they cannot be given an inch, or they will take a mile. There is no free market of ideas here. The market has been monopolized by Israel, and the truth only manages to be heard because passionate individuals are fighting to make the truth known. You cannot trust comments in favor of Israel or opposing Palestine. You cannot trust up/downvotes supporting Israel or condemning Palestine. Go to r/worldnews and you will see how skewed things have become. Large subreddits with a lot of traffic are somehow incredibly pro-Israel, despite the fact that all the smaller subreddits are pro-Palestine. This is not a coincidence. It’s just efficient use of manpower.

The Israeli elite are burning the good will of the Jewish people created by the atrocities the world witnessed them endure. It is not a coincidence that all this resembles Jewish conspiracies, but it is not because those conspiracies are real. By leaning into those conspiracies, the Israeli elite have the means to gain power while labeling anyone who calls them out an antisemite. Nuance is hard. Many seeing the evils and manipulation being committed by Israel are likely to fall into true antisemitism. And who will bear the brunt of this rise in anti-Jewish sentiment? It will not be the elites.

Additional Sources

Active use of social media to spread Hasbara. https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-rise-of-digital-diplomacy-could-be-changing-israels-media-image/

Documented methods of using social media and other platforms to push Israeli interests. https://www.transcript-verlag.de/978-3-8376-5509-4/external-communication-in-social-media-during-asymmetric-conflicts/

Israel has started wikipedia editing courses to “show the other side,” ie manipulate a democratic system of knowledge to bend it to convey their own version rather than writing from a neutral standpoint. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/18/wikipedia-editing-zionist-groups

Israeli task force has been created to disrupt protests. https://truthout.org/articles/israel-has-formed-a-task-force-to-carry-out-covert-campaigns-at-us-universities/

This article argues for the Strong Anti-Carnist thesis, which argues for the following:

Meat eaters cause a sufficient amount of animal suffering via their diets that not saving strangers’ lives in rescue cases is (in expectation) the lesser evil

Humanity has assumed an extremely negative moral value due to the suffering it causes to countless other animals, and as more people adquire more buying power in developing nations, the amount of suffering we cause is only growing. Will this trend ever reverse? Do we have any reason to be confident that humanity will adquire a positive value in the future?