Carrick Flynn's guest appearances

Carrick Flynn

Chatter

The Bridge by OR360

The Nonlinear Library

The Nonlinear Library: EA Forum

Elon Musk

Nick Kristof

Ross Ulbricht

Craig Wright

Peter Thiel

Andrew Smith

Bret Weinstein

Bobby Duffy

Dave Elliott

Bryan Caplan

Chris Martenson

Blake Richards

Bob Lazar

Peter Boghossian

James Lindsay

OwlTail

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Early spending research and Carrick Flynn, published by AllAmericanBreakfast on May 19, 2022 on The Effective Altruism Forum. In the main EA Forum post on the Flynn Congressional campaign loss, a comment thread got into the research on primary campaign spending. MHarris: How much did the $13 million shift the odds? That's the key question. The conventional political science on this is skeptical that donations have much of an effect on outcomes (albeit it's a bit more positive about lower profile candidates like Carrick)/... JoshYou: Fundraising is particularly effective in open primaries, such as this one. From the linked article: "But in 2017, Bonica published a study that found, unlike in the general election, early fundraising strongly predicted who would win primary races. That matches up with other research suggesting that advertising can have a serious effect on how people vote if the candidate buying the ads is not already well-known and if the election at hand is less predetermined along partisan lines." Owen Cotton-Barratt: Although early fundraising could be correlational with success rather than causal, if it's an indicator of who can generate support from the electorate... Here's a few key points from Bonica 2017 (main link, sci-hub link), along with spending data for the Salinas and Flynn campaigns. Summary: Money predicts victory in contested primaries. In contested primaries (like Carrick was involved in), the candidate who raises the most money wins. Early fundraising deficit is predictive of dropping out of the race in the first 90 days. Fundraising brings more support from professional political organizations like the DCCC. "One challenge in estimating campaign spending effects is that fundraising is likely endogenous to the probability of winning. If donors are actively targeting candidates who are most likely to be elected, causality could flow in reverse." Bonica's causal model by which money buys elections is never crisply stated, but has two main parts. First, early money keeps candidates from dropping out early on. Second, it garners them support from professional political organizations and enables them to buy the advertising and other things their campaign needs. However, this only matters in elections where there's a real chance for any candidate to win, such as contested primaries. According to New Statesman, by April 15th, Flynn had received 60% more itemized donation money than his opponent, Salinas, but 80% of Salinas's itemized donations were from in-state donors, as compared to 2.5% of Flynn's itemized donations. In terms of outside spending, Flynn had by the end received $12,329,074 to Salinas's $1,689,530. Flynn received about 7x more outside money than Salinas. Here's Bonica's regression for the probability of victory vs. the candidate's share of total fundraising. Flynn had about a 90% total fundraising share, so, eyeballing it, this model would have predicted he'd have about an 85% chance of victory. Instead, his main opponent, Salinas, received about twice as many votes as Flynn. Bonica didn't look at the degree to which a candidate's share of in-state money predicted their chance of victory. I'd be very curious to see such an analysis. We may also have a case of reverse causality on our hands, in which Sam Bankman-Fried, Flynn's largest donor, targeted him not for his chance of winning, but for his alignment with SBF's own political agenda. Based on Bonica's proposed mechanism by which money can influence a contested primary, it seems like a little seed money is what does the trick, not a tsunami of cash. Musings: If this "seed, not a tsunami" model is right, then this suggests a political strategy for consideration by EAs. EAs with strong pre-existing ties to their local community should run for office widely. SBF and other do...

<a href="https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/uhunXASWsKn4LQEMv/early-spending-research-and-carrick-flynn" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Link to original article</a> Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Early spending research and Carrick Flynn, published by AllAmericanBreakfast on May 19, 2022 on The Effective Altruism Forum. In the main EA Forum post on the Flynn Congressional campaign loss, a comment thread got into the research on primary campaign spending. MHarris: How much did the $13 million shift the odds? That's the key question. The conventional political science on this is skeptical that donations have much of an effect on outcomes (albeit it's a bit more positive about lower profile candidates like Carrick)/... JoshYou: Fundraising is particularly effective in open primaries, such as this one. From the linked article: "But in 2017, Bonica published a study that found, unlike in the general election, early fundraising strongly predicted who would win primary races. That matches up with other research suggesting that advertising can have a serious effect on how people vote if the candidate buying the ads is not already well-known and if the election at hand is less predetermined along partisan lines." Owen Cotton-Barratt: Although early fundraising could be correlational with success rather than causal, if it's an indicator of who can generate support from the electorate... Here's a few key points from Bonica 2017 (main link, sci-hub link), along with spending data for the Salinas and Flynn campaigns. Summary: Money predicts victory in contested primaries. In contested primaries (like Carrick was involved in), the candidate who raises the most money wins. Early fundraising deficit is predictive of dropping out of the race in the first 90 days. Fundraising brings more support from professional political organizations like the DCCC. "One challenge in estimating campaign spending effects is that fundraising is likely endogenous to the probability of winning. If donors are actively targeting candidates who are most likely to be elected, causality could flow in reverse." Bonica's causal model by which money buys elections is never crisply stated, but has two main parts. First, early money keeps candidates from dropping out early on. Second, it garners them support from professional political organizations and enables them to buy the advertising and other things their campaign needs. However, this only matters in elections where there's a real chance for any candidate to win, such as contested primaries. According to New Statesman, by April 15th, Flynn had received 60% more itemized donation money than his opponent, Salinas, but 80% of Salinas's itemized donations were from in-state donors, as compared to 2.5% of Flynn's itemized donations. In terms of outside spending, Flynn had by the end received $12,329,074 to Salinas's $1,689,530. Flynn received about 7x more outside money than Salinas. Here's Bonica's regression for the probability of victory vs. the candidate's share of total fundraising. Flynn had about a 90% total fundraising share, so, eyeballing it, this model would have predicted he'd have about an 85% chance of victory. Instead, his main opponent, Salinas, received about twice as many votes as Flynn. Bonica didn't look at the degree to which a candidate's share of in-state money predicted their chance of victory. I'd be very curious to see such an analysis. We may also have a case of reverse causality on our hands, in which Sam Bankman-Fried, Flynn's largest donor, targeted him not for his chance of winning, but for his alignment with SBF's own political agenda. Based on Bonica's proposed mechanism by which money can influence a contested primary, it seems like a little seed money is what does the trick, not a tsunami of cash. Musings: If this "seed, not a tsunami" model is right, then this suggests a political strategy for consideration by EAs. EAs with strong pre-existing ties to their local community should run for office widely. SBF and other do...

EA - Early spending research and Carrick Flynn by AllAmericanBreakfast

No congressional candidate in Oregon is getting more attention this cycle than Carrick Flynn, a Democratic candidate in Oregon's new 6th Congressional District. At least three SuperPACs are supporting him with millions of dollars in independent expenditures--more than any other candidate in America. Most recently, the SuperPAC aligned to House Democratic leadership (e.g. Speaker Nancy Pelosi) has signaled its support, to the frustration of Flynn's primary opponents, who called the move "unprecedented".  So--who, exactly, is Carrick Flynn? Flynn grew up in Vernonia, Oregon in a working class family. His family was displaced by a major flood, making him homeless for a period of time. On a Ford Family Foundation scholarship, he attended the University of Oregon and then Yale Law School. Since then, he has worked in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and pandemic prevention across the world. Now he's running for Congress. In this episode, we cover his ties to the 6th CD, China, drug policy, SuperPACs (and why he thinks they're supporting him), whether he's an outsider, and what kind of congressman he hopes to be. You can learn more about Flynn on his website, Twitter, or Facebook.  Thank you for listening and supporting the podcast! If you haven't yet, please subscribe to our YouTube channel and our newsletter.

No congressional candidate in Oregon is getting more attention this cycle than Carrick Flynn, a Democratic candidate in Oregon's new 6th Congressional District. At least three SuperPACs are supporting him with millions of dollars in independent expenditures--more than any other candidate in America. Most recently, the SuperPAC aligned to House Democratic leadership (e.g. Speaker Nancy Pelosi) has signaled its support, to the frustration of Flynn's primary opponents, who called the move "unprecedented".   So--who, exactly, is Carrick Flynn?   Flynn grew up in Vernonia, Oregon in a working class family. His family was displaced by a major flood, making him homeless for a period of time. On a Ford Family Foundation scholarship, he attended the University of Oregon and then Yale Law School. Since then, he has worked in artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and pandemic prevention across the world. Now he's running for Congress. In this episode, we cover his ties to the 6th CD, China, drug policy, SuperPACs (and why he thinks they're supporting him), whether he's an outsider, and what kind of congressman he hopes to be. You can learn more about Flynn on <a href="https://www.carrickflynnfororegon.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">his website</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/carrickflynnor" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.facebook.com/people/Carrick-Flynn/100077866545091" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Facebook</a>.    Thank you for listening and supporting the podcast! If you haven't yet, please subscribe to our <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3t7BqGHYlwrGo2pYX_-W4Q" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">YouTube channel</a> and <a href="https://theoregonway.substack.com/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">our newsletter</a>.

Who is Carrick Flynn, the man who could be Oregon’s next congressman? | EP 52

Carrick Flynn from The Future of Humanity Institute was our guest on today’s show. The Future of Humanity Institute is run by Nick Bostrom and Carrick is involved in their work on AI (Artificial Intelligence) governance and policy-making. Essentially, that means he is attempting to propose frameworks through which we could safely produce AI for the common good of humanity. We spoke all about the fears and potential for AI and how it could destroy or revolutionise our world. Resources https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/ https://www.ted.com/talks/samharriscanwebuildaiwithoutlosingcontroloverit https://www.ted.com/talks/nickbostromwhathappenswhenourcomputersgetsmarterthanwe_are https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-dawn-of-artificial-intelligence1 https://www.ted.com/talks/gradyboochdontfear_superintelligence https://www.ted.com/talks/kevinkellyhowaicanbringonasecondindustrialrevolution http://www.thejist.co.uk/science-and-tech/how-can-we-use-artificial-intelligence-when-we-cant-handle-real-intelligence/ Follow us on Facebook or Twitter or sign up for our mailing list to get information on my upcoming book, Brexit: The Establishment Civil War. Music from Just Jim - https://soundcloud.com/justjim

Carrick Flynn from The Future of Humanity Institute was our guest on today’s show. The Future of Humanity Institute is run by Nick Bostrom and Carrick is involved in their work on AI (Artificial Intelligence) governance and policy-making. Essentially, that means he is attempting to propose frameworks through which we could safely produce AI for the common good of humanity. We spoke all about the fears and potential for AI and how it could destroy or revolutionise our world. Resources <a href="http://https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/</a> <a href="http://https://www.ted.com/talks/sam_harris_can_we_build_ai_without_losing_control_over_it" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.ted.com/talks/samharriscanwebuildaiwithoutlosingcontroloverit</a> <a href="http://https://www.ted.com/talks/nick_bostrom_what_happens_when_our_computers_get_smarter_than_we_are" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.ted.com/talks/nickbostromwhathappenswhenourcomputersgetsmarterthanwe_are</a> <a href="http://https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-dawn-of-artificial-intelligence1" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-dawn-of-artificial-intelligence1</a> <a href="http://https://www.ted.com/talks/grady_booch_don_t_fear_superintelligence" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.ted.com/talks/gradyboochdontfear_superintelligence</a> <a href="http://https://www.ted.com/talks/kevin_kelly_how_ai_can_bring_on_a_second_industrial_revolution" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.ted.com/talks/kevinkellyhowaicanbringonasecondindustrialrevolution</a> <a href="http://http://www.thejist.co.uk/science-and-tech/how-can-we-use-artificial-intelligence-when-we-cant-handle-real-intelligence/" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.thejist.co.uk/science-and-tech/how-can-we-use-artificial-intelligence-when-we-cant-handle-real-intelligence/</a> Follow us on Facebook or Twitter or <a href="http://http://www.establishmentcivilwar.co.uk/" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">sign up for our mailing list to get information on my upcoming book, Brexit: The Establishment Civil War</a>. Music from Just Jim - <a href="http://https://soundcloud.com/justjim" rel="noopener nofollow" target="_blank">https://soundcloud.com/justjim</a>

Carrick Flynn on Legislating For Artificial Intelligence