An Indian friend told me that there are people who do that in India, too. He thought less of them, and joked about “water vegetables”.
I think they use the term Sea Vegetables for animals that are non motile (sea cucumbers, sea anemones, clams, scallops, etc) in addition to seaweed/kelp.
That’s probably what he said. This conversation was years ago.
Sea cucumbers, clams and scallops are all motile. Scallops can even swim.
Depends on what you want to believe. The more delicious they are the less you want to be convinced they have a soul.
Ok, but they could come up with a more scientific explanation. Invertebrates for example. Or do they not consider squid & octopus Sea Vegetables ?
This is religion mixed with culture and need for nutrients. It’s not science.
Words to live eat by.
One of the entertaining things about the FTX/Almeda collapse is the light it has shone on the Effective Altruism movement.
In brief, EA started from the perfectly reasonable and pretty important premise that if you are going to donate to charity, you should do so in the way that generates the most good per dollar. Also, you should not work for charity - you should maximise your earnings and donate most of them. Various luminaries of the movement announced that they would donate all earnings above IIRC £20K to charity. Bankman-Fried was closely associated with EA and a big public booster of its principles. So were many of the FTX/Alameda executives. But somehow, by 2022, the principles of EA meant that it was OK to live in considerable luxury, and earning the money to donate was a bigger priority than actually donating, as this excerpt from cross-examination suggests:
Right at the beginning of the day, the defense pushed back on statements Singh made the previous day characterizing the penthouse he shared with other employees as ostentatious and far too expensive. Singh had testified that he had expressed these concerns to Bankman-Fried. “Sam said that he would pay $100 million for the drama to just be done with and go away, which I took as a pretty clear sign that I should shut up and we should move forward with this,” he’d said about the conflict over the apartment purchase.
“You moved into the apartment?” asked the defense, which Singh answered affirmatively. “You and your girlfriend lived in one of the master bedroom suites, didn’t you?” “The nicest room in the house,” answered Singh. Asked if he’d ever considered moving out, Singh replied, “I considered moving out many times.” “But you didn’t,” the defense fired back.
…
Cohen revisited a $477 million loan made from FTX to Singh in late 2021, which was really Singh trying to exercise stock options he’d been granted
Cohen: One of the reasons you were looking to do this was you wanted to donate the money to charity.
Singh: Right.
Cohen: Did you end up doing that?
Singh: No.
Delicious.
I heard that Sam Bankman-Fried talked about effective altruism but the descriptions of how he spent money showed very little of it going to actual charity.
I think “effective altruism” is kind of the pinnacle of “perfection is the enemy of the good”
Bill Gates was one of the early proponents although not by that name. His foundation (for whom I did some minor IT work) was explicitly founded on the idea of working philanthropy smarter to lasting effect, not just dumping money on the expansive dry sands of individual human need only to watch it disappear ineffectually.
He did all that after he was stonking rich. Not while he was still an up-and-coming tycoon on the make. Which SBF and Singh most definitely were.
Big difference in attitude. Big difference in results.
I’m not at my computer but as I remember one of the Gates Foundation’s initiatives was providing micronutrients to people. The idea being that a small amount of money goes far to improve people’s health.
I think anti malarial nets were one of the classic examples of how an inexpensive thing can improve things for people.
and thank G-d for that! i love tuna salad with cheese
Yes. As interpreted by him, EA amounts to “Please excuse my wretched excess because I’m claiming that I plan ultimately to donate much of my wealth to causes that are worthy.”
He’s made various semi-private comments that amount to “Things go better if you tell people - especially reporters - what they want to hear.”
And I love bagels with lox and cream cheese - a classic Jewish vegetarian dish.
Politics?
Lol, as an American who doesn’t think of fish as “vegetarian”, i would call that a classic Jewish dairy dish.
No, that was always the illusion put on to make the entire movement seem non-threatening to outsiders. EA started from the rationalist community as a way to justify why a small group of grifters deserved money to help save us from our future AI overlords. They put a bunch of mumbo jumbo together and pulled together a bunch of efforts they weren’t really involved in and called it EA as a way to add a thin coat of paint to essentially Pascal’s Wager and it worked because it turns out that the rationalists aren’t actually all that rational.
They’d attract impressionable, idealistic people with talk about malaria nets and universal income and then gradually expose them to talk about simulation theory and x-risk to convince them that the real EA was to fund a bunch of esoteric institutes most outsiders had never heard of. They’ve become more masks off in recent years as the grift wheels have fallen off the bus and now topics like longtermism are out in the open rather than secret esoteric knowledge you only gain access to once you’ve cleared your thetans cognitive biases. To me, there’s no real better way of understanding what the real EA is than to read their debate on whether it was justified for the EA foundation to spend £15M on a mansion in rural England. Oh, and also, as with pretty much all perfectionist cults, it also morphed into a misogynistic sex cult where sexual abuse was systematic and rampant.
There’s a reason the larger charity community has largely wanted nothing to do with them for the entire time they’ve existed and it has nothing to do with how “blinded” and “stuck in an old paradigm” the non profit industrial complex is. To paraphrase a famous saying, "EA is both novel and good. The problem with EA is that the good bits aren’t novel and the novel bits aren’t good.
Yeah, I was probably guilty of striving a bit too much for objectivity there: I share your contempt for EA and it’s obvious grift, but I didn’t want to risk hijacking the thread.
Moderators often frown on that.