7 ms·

PG on nonprofits/Darfur

44 points by chris11 18y ago

BvS 18y ago
Best site I know to look for effective nonprofits: http://givewell.net/ http://givewell.net/. They have a good blog as well (I would especially recommend their take on program expenses vs. total expenses: http://blog.givewell.net/?cat=6 http://blog.givewell.net/?cat=6).
- blasdel 18y ago
  God no, they are the slimiest bunch of scammers: http://mssv.net/wiki/index.php/Givewell http://mssv.net/wiki/index.php/Givewell 1) A so-called "charity" engages in shady, dishonest marketing online 2) It's soaking up a huge amount of money as salary, while not doing anything itself, rather it's trying to act as a "charity middle man" 3) They promote transparency and accountability in philanthropy without bothering to practice what they preach. 4) Hedge fund wankers continuing to act in a greed-is-good manner despite entering a philanthropic endeavor, and weakening trust in non-profits indirectly (by being shady themselves) and directly (by bashing other charities anonymously in order to promote themselves).
  - BvS 18y ago
    1) I agree that they made some online comments while hiding their identity. On the other hand they apologized in a way that makes me believe that they will not do it again (check their blog or the mp3s of the board meeting following the incident). 2) They are totally transparent about their salaries which are obviously only a fraction of what they earned while working for hedge fonds (around 60,000 for NYC isn't that much, is it?). Since they are trying to allocate donation money to the ngos which are most efficient, they are actually doing a very important job. Having worked in development aid myself I can assure you that the output (saved lives... )per $ varies probably even more than if you compare programmers in a tech company. Just giving everyone the same amount although one is ten time as productive doesn't seem like a good idea. 3) I haven't heared about any ngo as transparent as GiveWell (providing the records of their board meetings as an mp3 is just one example, check out their website for more). 4) Just because they have worked for a hedge fund in the past means that they are up to no good? Don't get the argument.
rokhayakebe 18y ago
This type of habitat should also be implemented in developed countries.
- rman666 18y ago
  I agree and am not joking when I say I bet there would be a huge interest in people building them all over the US for/by homeless people, people interested in trying something new, 20-somethings living with parents, etc. The better we get at building them, the better they become and the better we can help others build them. What other groups can you add to this list, who would be interested in building one of these for themselves?
  - marvin 18y ago
    I doubt this would work out. Social pressure is too strong in the US, even for poor people. No one wants to live in what looks like a 3rd world mud hut.
    - rokhayakebe 18y ago
      I am sure the designer could make it look very appealing. Think about the Rocio Romero house or the Container house.
- pg 18y ago
  It is. When Kate renovated my house in California she built a retaining wall out of it. That could be a good way for this technology to get a foot in the door in the US. Another option that might work even better in the US is straw bale adobe: http://www.buildingwithawareness.com/house1.html http://www.buildingwithawareness.com/house1.html I believe the reason Kate & Co. went with Eco-Domes for Darfur was that they couldn't count on finding anything there except dirt. But there is lots of straw in the US.
  - ensignavenger 18y ago
    However, straw burns- and mildews, rather easily. I'm sure they have ways to minimize the negative consequences of this, but I think the dirt houses may be easier? What do they use for roofing on the Eco-Domes?
pg 18y ago
This is from a couple years ago. It didn't work out very well. The local government officials wouldn't let them build anything. The technology is cool though; literally.
- bokonist 18y ago
  Any idea why the government officials stop them from building anything?
  - pg 18y ago
    I get the impression that in a corrupt country like that, government officials say no to everything by default, in order to make you bribe them to say yes.
    - patio11 18y ago
      There is probably more than a little of that. Then there is the fact that when you're attempting to pull off a genocide of your political opponents so you can get at the oil beneath their land, letting in white do-gooders to build them cool new houses is not exactly #1 on the to-do list. Plus, any improvement in their living conditions just means the West sends your poor impoverished people less money that you can steal. Look at, say, aid flows to Costa Rica ("not a basket case") vs. pick-your-favorite-usual suspect. If you're a tyrant, miserable people are a rich national resource.
      - kailashbadu 18y ago
        Exactly. Darfur is wretched because the government has a stake in keeping it that way. Anything that threatens to weaken their stakes will in every likelihood meet resistance from the government. Had the government’s intent been to see a thriving and safe Darfur, the crisis wouldn’t exist in the first place. It’s not surprising that any attempt to improve lives in Darfur would be frowned upon. Be that as it may, it never ceases to amaze me how some nifty startups come up with innovative ideas that discreetly transform the lives of people more than what UN’s billion dollar diplomacy fails to pull off. For example the stoves that helped keep Darfur’s women safe. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/12/27/stoves.darfur/ http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/12/27/stoves.darfur... http://www.darfurstoves.org/ http://www.darfurstoves.org/
vaksel 18y ago
that donation page is abysmal...honestly if I just found that page using Google, I'd think it was a scam site. It looks like the site hasn't been updated since 2001
sutro 18y ago
I'll make a plug for these guys: http://www.inveneo.org/ http://www.inveneo.org/ I met the founder last year at an event in SF. They've created an impressive solar-powered computer for the developing world. They seem to embody the best of both high-tech entrepreneurship and nonprofit altruism. They would appreciate your donations.
nir 18y ago
Architecture For Humanity are doing very interesting work in the area of applying alt (and mainstream) design solutions for people in need, worldwide: http://architectureforhumanity.org/ http://architectureforhumanity.org/
andreyf 18y ago
What about a non-profit which works like a VC? Plug: http://www.acumenfund.org/ http://www.acumenfund.org/ (only "like a VC" by the same loose metaphor)

44 points by chris11 18y ago

BvS 18y ago

Best site I know to look for effective nonprofits: http://givewell.net/ http://givewell.net/. They have a good blog as well (I would especially recommend their take on program expenses vs. total expenses: http://blog.givewell.net/?cat=6 http://blog.givewell.net/?cat=6).

blasdel 18y ago
God no, they are the slimiest bunch of scammers: http://mssv.net/wiki/index.php/Givewell http://mssv.net/wiki/index.php/Givewell 1) A so-called "charity" engages in shady, dishonest marketing online 2) It's soaking up a huge amount of money as salary, while not doing anything itself, rather it's trying to act as a "charity middle man" 3) They promote transparency and accountability in philanthropy without bothering to practice what they preach. 4) Hedge fund wankers continuing to act in a greed-is-good manner despite entering a philanthropic endeavor, and weakening trust in non-profits indirectly (by being shady themselves) and directly (by bashing other charities anonymously in order to promote themselves).
- BvS 18y ago
  1) I agree that they made some online comments while hiding their identity. On the other hand they apologized in a way that makes me believe that they will not do it again (check their blog or the mp3s of the board meeting following the incident). 2) They are totally transparent about their salaries which are obviously only a fraction of what they earned while working for hedge fonds (around 60,000 for NYC isn't that much, is it?). Since they are trying to allocate donation money to the ngos which are most efficient, they are actually doing a very important job. Having worked in development aid myself I can assure you that the output (saved lives... )per $ varies probably even more than if you compare programmers in a tech company. Just giving everyone the same amount although one is ten time as productive doesn't seem like a good idea. 3) I haven't heared about any ngo as transparent as GiveWell (providing the records of their board meetings as an mp3 is just one example, check out their website for more). 4) Just because they have worked for a hedge fund in the past means that they are up to no good? Don't get the argument.

rokhayakebe 18y ago

This type of habitat should also be implemented in developed countries.

rman666 18y ago
I agree and am not joking when I say I bet there would be a huge interest in people building them all over the US for/by homeless people, people interested in trying something new, 20-somethings living with parents, etc. The better we get at building them, the better they become and the better we can help others build them. What other groups can you add to this list, who would be interested in building one of these for themselves?
- marvin 18y ago
  I doubt this would work out. Social pressure is too strong in the US, even for poor people. No one wants to live in what looks like a 3rd world mud hut.
  - rokhayakebe 18y ago
    I am sure the designer could make it look very appealing. Think about the Rocio Romero house or the Container house.
pg 18y ago
It is. When Kate renovated my house in California she built a retaining wall out of it. That could be a good way for this technology to get a foot in the door in the US. Another option that might work even better in the US is straw bale adobe: http://www.buildingwithawareness.com/house1.html http://www.buildingwithawareness.com/house1.html I believe the reason Kate & Co. went with Eco-Domes for Darfur was that they couldn't count on finding anything there except dirt. But there is lots of straw in the US.
- ensignavenger 18y ago
  However, straw burns- and mildews, rather easily. I'm sure they have ways to minimize the negative consequences of this, but I think the dirt houses may be easier? What do they use for roofing on the Eco-Domes?

pg 18y ago

This is from a couple years ago. It didn't work out very well. The local government officials wouldn't let them build anything. The technology is cool though; literally.

bokonist 18y ago
Any idea why the government officials stop them from building anything?
- pg 18y ago
  I get the impression that in a corrupt country like that, government officials say no to everything by default, in order to make you bribe them to say yes.
  - patio11 18y ago
    There is probably more than a little of that. Then there is the fact that when you're attempting to pull off a genocide of your political opponents so you can get at the oil beneath their land, letting in white do-gooders to build them cool new houses is not exactly #1 on the to-do list. Plus, any improvement in their living conditions just means the West sends your poor impoverished people less money that you can steal. Look at, say, aid flows to Costa Rica ("not a basket case") vs. pick-your-favorite-usual suspect. If you're a tyrant, miserable people are a rich national resource.
    - kailashbadu 18y ago
      Exactly. Darfur is wretched because the government has a stake in keeping it that way. Anything that threatens to weaken their stakes will in every likelihood meet resistance from the government. Had the government’s intent been to see a thriving and safe Darfur, the crisis wouldn’t exist in the first place. It’s not surprising that any attempt to improve lives in Darfur would be frowned upon. Be that as it may, it never ceases to amaze me how some nifty startups come up with innovative ideas that discreetly transform the lives of people more than what UN’s billion dollar diplomacy fails to pull off. For example the stoves that helped keep Darfur’s women safe. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/12/27/stoves.darfur/ http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/12/27/stoves.darfur... http://www.darfurstoves.org/ http://www.darfurstoves.org/

vaksel 18y ago

that donation page is abysmal...honestly if I just found that page using Google, I'd think it was a scam site. It looks like the site hasn't been updated since 2001

sutro 18y ago

I'll make a plug for these guys: http://www.inveneo.org/ http://www.inveneo.org/ I met the founder last year at an event in SF. They've created an impressive solar-powered computer for the developing world. They seem to embody the best of both high-tech entrepreneurship and nonprofit altruism. They would appreciate your donations.

nir 18y ago

Architecture For Humanity are doing very interesting work in the area of applying alt (and mainstream) design solutions for people in need, worldwide: http://architectureforhumanity.org/ http://architectureforhumanity.org/

andreyf 18y ago

What about a non-profit which works like a VC? Plug: http://www.acumenfund.org/ http://www.acumenfund.org/ (only "like a VC" by the same loose metaphor)