Natalie Cargill
@NatalieRCargill
Followers
5,358
Following
422
Media
159
Statuses
523
Explore trending content on Musk Viewer
#LISAxVictoriasSecret
• 1077435 Tweets
#VSFashionShow
• 658371 Tweets
Messi
• 348963 Tweets
Argentina
• 286138 Tweets
Adriana Lima
• 207333 Tweets
Allred
• 180930 Tweets
Ted Cruz
• 178505 Tweets
bella hadid
• 139886 Tweets
gigi
• 136520 Tweets
Tyla
• 100192 Tweets
Peru
• 95640 Tweets
Bolivia
• 93863 Tweets
Yankees
• 87984 Tweets
kate moss
• 58968 Tweets
Cher
• 49728 Tweets
Paraguay
• 49499 Tweets
Lautaro
• 38038 Tweets
バーニス
• 31488 Tweets
ميسي
• 22701 Tweets
#DWTS
• 20386 Tweets
期日前投票
• 18436 Tweets
Nico Paz
• 17376 Tweets
शरद पूर्णिमा
• 17184 Tweets
ALL RISE
• 16928 Tweets
#RoçaAFazenda
• 16600 Tweets
Luiz Henrique
• 16150 Tweets
Aaron Judge
• 15829 Tweets
Raúl Jiménez
• 14713 Tweets
Raphinha
• 12299 Tweets
Machis
• 11078 Tweets
Rodrygo
• 10884 Tweets
Pinned Tweet
I gave a TED talk! 5 years ago I founded a nonprofit, and here’s what we’ve learned about the potential of ambitious giving — if we get serious about it 🧵
10
62
284
So
@ESYudkowsky
just gave (or, rather, read from his phone) a 6-minute TED talk on AI that he had *1 day* to prep for. People laughed at the idea that AI might kill us, and then they didn't. Standing ovation. Actually very moving.
35
25
598
I love learning about times when civilization could have gone Very Wrong but didn’t (or, at least, didn’t go the Most Wrong, and kinda mainly cooperated to prevent global disaster). Fixing the ozone layer is one such story, and it has a lot more drama than I was expecting! 🧵
3
21
214
This is
@catehall
's "about me" & I promise it's real and not a joke. If you're working on something difficult, I could not recommend consulting her any more strongly. She's extraordinarily intelligent, incisive, and direct, & has lots of experience doing very difficult things.
I'm planning to take on some consulting work this month while I continue exploring AI roles. I'm circulating this form to gauge interest in different services. If you might want to work with me, please LMK -- ok to answer anonymously. RTs appreciated!
4
5
55
0
2
94
Humans see themselves as distinct from other animals, but science is forcing us to reconsider
http://t.co/T5HrtnO9rw
http://t.co/MAtjPW7aXi
5
54
56
It was such a joy to speak at TED yesterday! Thank you
@TEDTalks
for having me. Short answer to the below: a LOT. Slightly longer answer now up on Longview's website!
5
2
78
Cash transfers work -- if you want to help end extreme poverty ,
@GiveDirectly
is really, really hard to beat
1
13
68
While I'm in the business of taking illicit photos at TED,
@_HannahRitchie
from
@OurWorldInData
was incredible! We don't have to the be "last generation"; we could be the *first* generation to provide a good for life for everyone *and* preserve the world for future generations ❤️
3
3
62
Thrilled to be speaking at TED this year!
@finmoorhouse
,
@tyler_m_john
and I working on a vision for what the world could achieve if the richest 10% gave away just 10%. It's a lot. And we cannot wait to share! ❤️
2
2
57
Kahneman's 'Thinking Fast and Slow', a ridiculously short summary
http://t.co/Q3tKZiCB7O
http://t.co/8iL0nTaBcU
0
32
43
Turns out a 14 minute TED talk isn’t enough time to say much about all this. So today Longview is also launching a 56-page research report to elaborate on these findings, with much more information and updated figures.
You can read that here:
1
4
47
If you can't go vegan but care about animals, consider avoiding just chicken, eggs, and fish:
http://t.co/N6gVfiw83N
http://t.co/SWm3k6S8f8
5
22
30
Let’s start with the story of Norman Borlaug. With just $100k philanthropic support, Norman and his team spent years researching how to improve crop yields amidst very difficult conditions. After much trial and error, they succeeded, & helped to kickstart the ‘Green Revolution’.
3
1
38
The most numerate subjects were the best at (mis)interpreting data to support their politics
2
20
29
The results were astonishing – global cereal production tripled within fifty years, entire countries were brought back from the brink of famine, and on some estimates, the work he began ended up saving a billion lives.
1
0
35
Would you punish someone for a crime, if they would never find out they had been punished?
http://t.co/QA0fjgtxhd
http://t.co/RRXTdt2yBS
2
32
24
Which leads me to a modest proposal: what could we achieve if the world’s richest 1% gave 10%?
1
2
31
You can watch the talk below. Hope you like it!
6
4
31
Exposure to evolutionary psychology theories had no impact on male judgments of sex crimes
http://t.co/4sCZxSHzrd
http://t.co/RdD0j0k4jk
1
14
24
I think there are two lessons here.
First, huge problems have been solved, and can be solved.
Second, philanthropy at its best can be truly transformative — and not just in the buzzword sense.
1
1
29
The richest 1% own nearly half of global wealth.
That means: if the global 1% started giving the higher of 10% of their income or 2.5% of their net worth to philanthropic projects, they’d raise $3.5 trillion — more than the UK’s GDP — in just one year.
2
5
28
Why Cognitive (Neuro)Science Matters for Ethics:
http://t.co/UYRIwoKcku
http://t.co/mBdsLeBpdd
1
3
22
The most reliable general indicators of lying, as distinct from nervousness -
http://t.co/1thA413YJA
http://t.co/Xjo6guUOMg
5
20
19
This is moronic and counter-productive. Be a bit (more) vegan! Something infinetely better than nothing
2
2
17
This isn’t the only story of philanthropy’s huge potential. Take the March of Dimes Foundation – supported by donations from 80 million Americans – which funded the development of the polio vaccine in the 1950s…
1
1
24
We all know about philanthropy at its worst: as an excuse for unethical business practices, or as a status game for the ultra-wealthy.
But the right response isn’t to cynically give up on philanthropy: it’s to get serious about giving more, and giving better.
1
4
24
Want to intimidate people? Easy, just spontaneously increase your fWHR (tilt your face up/down)
http://t.co/YKHL1LcJdW
http://t.co/MzgVJUAfmj
1
9
18
What does the 2-4-6 test have to do with wrongful conviction? Confirmation bias and the law:
http://t.co/h1g5xWTUP4
http://t.co/EpUAntXGnf
3
11
15
… or Katherine McCormick, the suffragette, biologist, and philanthropist who funded the development of the first oral contraceptive pill. Or golden rice, or the Pugwash Conferences on disarmament, or the Nunn-Lugar Act…
I could go on!
2
0
23
0
16
19
The answer is: a huge amount.
That money could make sure nobody lives in extreme poverty for that year, and enable millions of the world’s poorest to lift themselves out of poverty for good.
It could fund contraception, maternal care, and newborn care for all women for 5 years.
3
4
24
Nobody is immune from resisting science they wish weren’t true. Even liberals
http://t.co/RIshuq5kPB
http://t.co/xaMdWtufwr
1
12
16
Compassion Fade: Affect and Charity Are Greatest for a Single Child in Need:
http://t.co/AvidCPoIjI
http://t.co/rRKvUsiHmP
0
3
13
Can there be a moral distinction between causing harm and letting harm happen?
http://t.co/U8DROOU4ed
2
11
18
Beware over-reliance on outdated models. Consider the precautionary principle when potential for global disaster. Even huge corporations might respond to credentialed panels (with former colleagues on them). And "science fiction" to internationally-agreed fact can take <10 years.
1
2
22
OK obvs
@Liv_Boeree
&
@catehall
are ridiculously smart, fascinating and articulate, but what I love about this is how Liv's virtues as a friend are so apparent -- she really does stand by & deeply care for her friends in ways that are remarkable & rare
0
1
21
We are reluctant to harm things that have minds, we know killing is harmful, ...so...we deny that animals have minds
http://t.co/NfIuKu4vRW
1
12
16
Getting ready to drop the news on high impact philanthropy with
@DanielleGram
&
@Liv_Boeree
❤️
#WebSummit
1
3
19
"If there is no God, so the argument goes, there is no objectivity in ethics..."
http://t.co/i6a4pLXtk1
6
10
15
It cost less than a thousandth of that amount to eradicate smallpox — a disease which killed more people in the 20th century than both world wars combined. $3.5 trillion is a lot of money.
So what could we do with a year of giving?
1
0
20
Can we justify discrimination based on species-membership?
http://t.co/FZjWOnn6wq
http://t.co/dUK7FhIbJ8
1
11
13
How laws around the world do and do not protect women from violence
http://t.co/50PnFgkEmp
http://t.co/sIJ7t1Sp7T
1
15
15
Cost increases that would result from free-range and other more humane farming -
http://t.co/N6gVfiw83N
http://t.co/8FA48d3DEj
2
14
15
We could even prevent the next pandemic.
We can make sure essential workers have access to advanced PPE; use sequencing technology to raise the alarm early; build platforms to produce vaccines faster than ever, and invest in technology like Far-UVC light to clean indoor air.
1
0
17
The Montreal Protocol has now been signed by every country on the planet– to date it is the *only* treaty to have been universally ratified.
1
0
18
Gender and Justice: Why Women in the Judiciary Really Matter
http://t.co/cYaFCQquPb
http://t.co/FM1sM0HWqs
1
14
11
Sometimes it feels like the best we can do is deliver first aid while all of the world’s problems grow bigger and bigger.
I don’t think that’s right. If we can combine ambitious giving with strategic plans for action, we can really solve some of the world’s biggest problems.
2
0
18
Peter Singer: I want to shame charities into proving the worth of their spending
http://t.co/hPDqRTeEVS
0
9
13
.
@sentientist
did a good job of answering the tricky questions for me
.
@NatalieRCargill
gave a great talk on the law, nonhuman animals, moral philosophy/movements & sentience politics
0
0
10
0
0
8
For roughly what we spend on novelty socks, we could double spending on nuclear weapons risk reduction in perpetuity. And for even less, we could increase tenfold the philanthropic funding for AI safety.
Then we could double spending on clean energy R&D until 2050.
1
1
17
The Most-Cited Law Review Articles of ALL TIME (
#Harvard
&
#Yale
an untouchable duo)
http://t.co/SXskPFWrU0
http://t.co/jZNTHq1NrS
2
19
17
I had to suffer the terror of
@Liv_Boeree
wandering about the house like this, at odd hours and without warning, so YOU could watch her latest short film. It's amazing and I loved it:
1
0
15
How to distinguish between valid criticisms of proposed new legislation and those motivated by resistance to change:
http://t.co/5D3Cc1mV3m
1
6
10
Bankers push in the trolley problem! Oh wait. "This is competely explainable by sex difference"
http://t.co/qlpOhAnk4B
http://t.co/3Xqg0mm1yj
0
8
10
Why speculative detail dramatically reduces the likelihood of an explanation being true :
http://t.co/SoJFjLGEIE
1
3
9
According to Google CEO, every couple of days we create the same amount of info that we did from the dawn of civilization up until 2003.
4
9
9
1975: Chair of the Board said that ozone depletion theory is "a science fiction tale...a load of rubbish...utter nonsense”/ 1979: “No ozone depletion has ever been detected”/ 1987: Testified to Congress, “there is no immediate crisis that demands unilateral regulation”
1
2
14
"There is no fundamental difference between humans and the higher mammals in their mental faculties" -- Charles Darwin
1
4
11
* This is barely an exaggeration — excess UV-B light kills plants; ozone blocks UV-B light:
1
0
13
Attractive men, put a picture on your CV. Attractive women, don't:
http://t.co/E1PaJU2XkZ
http://t.co/SNqdg8FCsp
2
11
9
Guess what? More people are living in peace now. Just look at the numbers
http://t.co/lqzJDLHqlF
http://t.co/Wq3JBl63sF
2
6
11
Children want to seem to be fair (flipping a coin for a prize) but their coin 'wins' too often
http://t.co/KR3SqmYdOt
http://t.co/8bIaXrOSyR
0
11
12
For every fox killed in a hunt, around 50,000 animals were killed in UK factory farms. Lets
#MakeCrueltyHistory
not
#KeepCrueltyHistory
0
8
11
Would you rather provide one blind person with a dog or
cure 2,000 people of blindness?
1
2
9
How pessimism about the future affects how we think about humanity and extinction:
0
2
13
"The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off" - Gloria Steinem
0
4
10
Witnesses rated as more deceptive when they told the truth then lied, rather than lying first then telling the truth
http://t.co/snLrVpIuhj
1
11
9
In March 1988 Chairman Richard Heckert said there was no reason to restrict CFCs as the “evidence does not point to the need for dramatic CFC emission reductions”. Just *20 days later*, however, he announced dramatic turnaround: Du Pont would get out of the CFC business forever.
1
0
11
The turnaround came after a new NASA panel of experts who recomputed the data using new and better methods. Perhaps importantly, the panel contained Mack MacFarland, who had spent a decade working on ozone science in government and had been one of Du Pont’s chief scientists.
1
0
11
It turned out that the existing model lacked a key ingredient – it was only looking at how ozone-depleting chemicals acted in normal circumstances (like in a lab). It overlooked how certain ozone-destroying chemicals were activated in polar clouds at extremely cold temperatures.
1
0
11
In the 70s, Jonathan Shanklin was in Antarctica to digitise records on ozone levels. He noticed that the measurements - which had been stable for decades - had begun to drop dramatically (ozone absorbs damaging UV radiation from the sun and…makes life on earth possible*)
1
0
11
These are some ideas, and there are more in the report. This is of course not the one true exact best way to spend so much money — there are many ways the ideas could be improved upon. What matters is that we *can* start deploying capital to solve global problems if people give.
2
0
12
According to some models (which we should approach with caution!), the Protocol and its amendments have prevented up to two million cases of skin cancer every year (and the ozone layer should return to pre-1980 levels around the middle of the century).
1
3
11
Do wild animals matter too? Podcast of Brian Tomasik on reducing wild animal suffering
http://t.co/lL6vOHbhkT
http://t.co/LLD3eUWFwt
0
4
12
"Humans...seek rules even when there are none" …Why rats sometimes outperform humans
@Freek_Vermeulen
@LuciusCaviola
1
12
8
*Bonus* a quick look at the book and all the tricks within in, from DuPont - the largest producer of ozone-depleting chemicals at the time:
1
0
10
Why doesn't science have a more serious influence on public policy?
http://t.co/H9xYAzsXl6
http://t.co/mAQRsiFjiV
1
6
9
Join me
@HTLGIFestival
in London this September to hear me talk about The Morality of the Tribe with legendary human rights campaigner
@PeterTatchell
and justice theorist David Miller: Check out the full programme here:
1
3
8
Blue lighting decreases food consumption by men, but not women(Smurf-themed man restaurants?)
http://t.co/kuAtzUKNQX
1
0
7
Technologies on the stand: Legal and ethical questions in neuroscience and robotics
http://t.co/Q4YPGIxbO7
http://t.co/hHR1cqKPXW
1
6
7
Doing Good Better by Wiliam MacAskill – if you read this book, you'll change the charities you donate to
http://t.co/7f1Gvr7O7f
0
0
10
Fortunately, however, those with their heads screwed on “argued that precautionary principles were part of the convention, and — even as the research planes were flying from Chile — signed the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer."
1
0
9
Thanks to Frank Sherwood and Mario Molina, we’d known since at least 1974 that chemicals produced by CFCs (chemicals used in fridges, aerosol sprays, and other things) might deplete ozone. (This discovery later won them the Nobel Prize).
1
0
9
Supine posture decreases rationalisation (if we do below task supine, will admit difficulty)
http://t.co/hCgr1xRfbb
http://t.co/pq8CfFTu2F
0
3
7
Just months after the treaty, however, Shanklin and colleagues published another report showing that fully *one third* of the ozone layer in Antarctica was already depleted. A far cry from the predicted 2%. What was going on?
1
0
9
Exciting stuff! And potentially some lessons for those of us working on global challenges today:
1
0
8