[HN Gopher] Job board to work on problems like climate change an...
___________________________________________________________________
Job board to work on problems like climate change and food
insecurity
Author : tndl
Score : 176 points
Date : 2021-04-19 03:40 UTC (19 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (goodjobs.careers)
(TXT) w3m dump (goodjobs.careers)
| GoodJokes wrote:
| Problems like climate change and food insecurity are not
| technological problems at this point. They are political
| problems. The job board you want is the board that organizes
| people to demand political change.
| thaddeusmt wrote:
| Yes, but maybe a company or organization is, in fact, looking
| at political climate change solutions, but needs tech hires for
| their operations, etc.
|
| As the target audience for a job board like this, the question
| I am starting with isn't "how can tech solve climate change?",
| it's "how can I apply my tech skills to a problem like climate
| change?".
| goodpoint wrote:
| > They are political problems
|
| That's true by definition. As political systems are very
| sensitive to technology, doing tech work can be a very
| effective form of activism.
| exdsq wrote:
| The issue with this site is that someone in tech will inflate the
| 'goodness' of tech projects. I looked at a few companies and
| they're hardly world changing. If your goal is doing good things
| you'd be far better off working at FAANG or investment banking
| and donating a % of your salary to proven effective organisations
| than bet on 'digitising oil and gas'.
|
| 80,000 hours does this well https://80000hours.org/job-board/
| spacebear wrote:
| Many of the jobs on the 80,000 hours board actually seem quite
| evil:
|
| "Research Scientist, AI. Facebook"
|
| "Data Scientist, Technology and Resource Investment Decision-
| making. US Government, Central Intelligence Agency"
|
| "Deep Learning Researcher, Computer Vision Algorithms. Baidu"
| exdsq wrote:
| So a few things here.
|
| 1. ML at Facebook and Baidu pay well so you could use that
| money to fund more effective things.
|
| 2. By working in these roles you have the ability to change
| how things are done. Certainly more than you usually could
| from the outside.
|
| 3. There's a big push in the effective altruism group on safe
| AI/ML. I disagree with this but that's a factor in their
| weightings.
| shubik22 wrote:
| Can't point 1 be used to justify any unethical job that
| pays a lot? What's the point of having a job board with
| "ethical" jobs then?
| vendiddy wrote:
| These all feel a bit indirect on how they _might_ have a
| positive impact.
|
| For a job board like this, I would prefer that the
| companies themselves are directly working on high impact
| problems that are a benefit to society and the environment.
|
| Would also be nice to see a quick description of the impact
| each company is trying to have.
| striking wrote:
| There are other high paying jobs out there, and I'd like to
| know where this "change from the inside" thing comes from.
| I've not seen anything that indicates that that's true for
| Facebook, and have seen a few things that show the
| opposite[1][2].
|
| Working at a company that does these things is no lesser
| evil in my book.
|
| 1: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/facebook-
| employ...
|
| 2: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/mqw86u/i_am_sophi
| e_zh...
| exdsq wrote:
| So the argument does take it to the slight extreme but
| assume you're good enough to eventually be promoted to
| lead the department; at that point you're going to be
| able to introduce change. Certainly the change you could
| introduce would be greater than taking a similar paid job
| at a different organization. I appreciate this isn't the
| case for a lot of people but it's a non-zero chance and
| therefore a factor to consider!
| striking wrote:
| I disagree that this is even a factor to consider, and
| that we should be rigorous when assigning probabilities
| to events.
|
| Seriously, what meaningful and controversial change has
| the rank-and-file (or even the managerial staff) at
| Facebook managed to accomplish? I'm not really asking for
| your opinion here as much as I am asking if you have any
| reports or information on the matter that contradicts the
| things I've heard or seen or read.
|
| Why are you so certain? Their own employees feel that
| public pressure is the only way out, evidenced by their
| employees publicly speaking out or leaking things to the
| press to effect change. How, in your eyes, does this come
| anywhere close to a degree of certainty that change from
| within is possible?
| exdsq wrote:
| I'm not suggesting software developer #1034643 at
| Alphabet will be able to influence their AI safety
| policies, I am suggesting Lead AI Safety Researcher #17
| at Alphabet will be able to influence their AI safety
| policies - possibly not, but there's a strong non-zero
| chance there. Certainly their chances of influencing AI
| safety policies at Alphabet, which people argue is
| important, is far greater than if they were a finance
| engineer earning the same salary at Jane Street. You
| could argue that Timnit Gebru was unable to introduce
| change because she was fired before publishing the paper
| about Google Brain, but nine congressmen have asked for
| an investigation and it's hardly over so who knows
| what'll happen there.
|
| I've read similar evidence about people not being able to
| do much, but someone (or some committee) is having an
| impact on research direction somewhere within the company
| (else they wouldn't have even started that research
| department to begin with).
| striking wrote:
| > nine congressmen have asked for an investigation
|
| Is that change from within? Is this not proving my point?
|
| > else they wouldn't have even started that research
| department to begin with
|
| You couldn't think of a single other reason to start a
| research department? Like, say, to say you're doing
| research but without regard for the results?
| heavyset_go wrote:
| > _2. By working in these roles you have the ability to
| change how things are done. Certainly more than you usually
| could from the outside._
|
| No salaried employee is going to change Facebook's
| incentives to profit from violating privacy and selling
| their users' data.
| justfortechnews wrote:
| There's a similar company https://goodgigs.app/ that does this as
| well, but more built-out (and seemingly more focused on non-
| technical roles).
|
| Not sure your plans for this page, but could be an interesting
| conversation with that founder.
| ekzy wrote:
| Good idea but it would be good to have a description / intro text
| to the company and how they are contributing to saving the
| planet. Are the companies approved? For example this one on the
| landing page, I don't understand how it fits:
| https://www.sayprimer.com/
| Hitton wrote:
| The Primer's business model seems to be invasion of privacy as
| a service. It looks like the job board is just a way to find
| employees willing to work for less, because they think they do
| something "useful".
| YKreator wrote:
| I had exactly the same reaction about Sayprimer. It completely
| turned me off. In fact, it would take a description of the
| company's mission to understand how it is trying to have a
| positive impact.
| n4r9 wrote:
| Came to say exactly the same thing. I was confused about how
| the top few posts fit the theme. You could even have a set of
| tags like #greencompany or #foodsecurity to identify each
| company's contribution and how tangible it is.
| tjbiddle wrote:
| Also, also came to say exactly the same thing.
|
| My thought process: 1. Oh - neat idea! [ Checks website ] 2.
| Okay, cool. Early stages, but on the right track. 3. Who the
| hell are these companies 4. Ugh, I'm not going to click on
| each one to find out. 5. Let's go comment about this on HN. I
| bet someone beat me to the punch.
| tndl wrote:
| Good call, thanks for the feedback
| klohto wrote:
| Like the idea, but I'm confused how companies like:
|
| * Primer - Reach your leads everywhere
|
| * Andium - Digitizing the Oil & Gas Industry
|
| fit into the "problems like climate change and food insecurity"
| bucket.
| tndl wrote:
| Thanks for the feedback, I made some updates. Don't know how
| Primer slipped through...
| ramary wrote:
| Hi, Andium here. Definitely understand the skepticism about our
| work with the oil and gas industry and its impact on climate
| change. The high level is that the world doesn't know whether
| society has reached peak oil. Even if it has, oil consumption
| will continue to be a major contributor to planet warming gases
| (CO2 and CO2 equivalents) for decades to come. While regulation
| plays catch up and alternative energy usage continues to ramp
| up over the coming decades (something we support fully), we're
| working to reduce the carbon footprint of the oil and gas
| industry today. Our flare monitoring product in particular
| (https://andium.com/products/andium-flare-tracking) addresses
| the venting of methane at upstream wells, an issue that is
| gaining increasing regulatory traction in the US.
|
| - https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/biden-admins-
| me...
|
| - https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2021/03/26/environmental-
| advoc...
| capableweb wrote:
| To be honest, your homepage doesn't exactly give the
| impression you're a "saving the environment" company but
| rather you seem to be targeting businesses who wants to save
| costs. Here are some excerpts from your landing page
| (https://andium.com/):
|
| - "At Andium, we're saving companies millions of dollars
| annually, while increasing safety"
|
| - "we offer an ecosystem of automated products and services
| that provide the next generation of remote monitoring
| capabilities"
|
| - "Increasing site visibility while reducing onsite time,
| manual labor, and human error equates to major cost savings,
| and saving our clients' time and money is in our DNA"
|
| - "We've spent countless hours developing our technology and
| created the first-ever thermal imaging solution for safe,
| cost-effective tank-level management that has saved our
| clients millions at scale"
|
| If you're truly in the same bucket as "problems like climate
| change and food insecurity" problems, you probably want to
| update your core messaging across your website
| svieira wrote:
| To be fair though, if you're targeting a business with
| marketing (e. g. a website) you probably want to speak to
| the first-order problems the business is having (e. g. cost
| savings, safety) not to second-order problems that those
| outside the business are most concerned with (e. g. climate
| change, food insecurity), even if your company is _also_
| invested in reducing second-order problems.
| capableweb wrote:
| speaking frankly, you shouldn't advertise your company on
| a job board for "problems like climate change and food
| insecurity" if those problems are just problems you wanna
| fix on the side instead of the main problems you're
| working on solving.
| boringg wrote:
| I think realistically they are in the business of making
| O&G cheaper to extract through efficiencies that gain some
| climate merit (but very little). It's more like the limited
| climate benefit is an add-on to core business.
|
| The challenge in selling to O&G companies is they don't
| really care about climate initiatives. They do have
| concerns but its not their bread and butter there fore you
| have to package your sell in other ways such as cost
| efficiency.
| ramary wrote:
| > I think realistically they are in the business of
| making O&G cheaper to extract through efficiencies that
| gain some climate merit (but very little). It's more like
| the limited climate benefit is an add-on to core
| business.
|
| Respectfully, this is not the business we are in, but I
| understand how our current messaging could convey it that
| way. That being said, there is a strong incentive to
| build products that both address climate pollution and
| reduce costs. It's a fine line and one that we think
| about constantly at the company.
| boringg wrote:
| True my apologies for incorrect statement. The business
| you are in is IOT for O&G. Ensuring that flaring/leaks
| are monitored. That said that has some beneficial climate
| impacts but is mostly a worker safety issue and a
| regulatory infraction problem. A balancing act for sure
| (good products / reducing costs)!
| ramary wrote:
| Thanks for the direct and detailed feedback, much
| appreciated. We're planning a website revamp post our
| Series A which closed a few weeks ago - will definitely
| relay this feedback to our team.
| klohto wrote:
| Thanks for the reply!
|
| Honest question, but doesn't enabling the Oil & Gas
| industries to reach peak effectiveness have the opposite
| effect?
|
| What I mean by this, O&G right now is highly ineffective and
| to fit into regulatory limit they need to downscale
| operations just to have a "reserve". By allowing them, for
| example, to monitor the Flare and other things, don't you
| actually allow them to increase the production because now
| they have the data and means how to squeeze effectively into
| the limits?
| ramary wrote:
| Of course, thanks for your thoughtful question!
|
| The short answer is that nobody knows for sure ... yet.
| Regulatory bodies, NGOs, and ESG-focused activist and
| impact investors are actively developing frameworks and
| methodologies for total life cycle GHG accounting. [1] and
| [2] are a couple of examples in the US from around the time
| the Paris Climate Agreement was signed. This area is
| evolving quickly as momentum has built over the last few
| years for a global approach to getting to net-zero
| emissions. We keep a close eye on this and continuously
| evaluate the latest developments in the context of product
| development ideation.
|
| [1] from 2016: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2
| 016-03/documents...
|
| [2] from 2015: https://www.eia.gov/conference/2015/pdf/pres
| entations/skone....
| Nicholas_C wrote:
| Cool product, I think limiting flaring is one of the more
| important ESG mandates in the oilfield right now.
|
| Andium looks somewhat similar to Rebellion Photonics
| (recently sold to Honeywell), although the use case is
| different. Not sure if you're familiar with their product.
| boringg wrote:
| Appreciate you posting. I would say that the adverse opinions
| from most people on the board stem from the fact that O&G has
| been intentionally gaslighting public discourse since the 80s
| and be helping oil and gas through cost efficiencies you are
| enabling them to maintain power and continue to pollute.
|
| You might have a benefit to lowering the CI of each barrel
| minutely but really at the end of the day you are hurting the
| other industries that are trying to get a footing. That's why
| you are getting some negative feedback. Either through lack
| of knowledge of the history of the industry or intentionally
| painting a climate tech friendly perspective due to the new
| found interest at large of the general population / investing
| population.
| whatshisface wrote:
| Well, you couldn't expect any other industry to supply gas
| lighting.
| resoluteteeth wrote:
| Your company may not be actively bad, and maybe it's having a
| slightly positive effect, but it doesn't sound like it
| belongs in a list of companies trying to solve problems like
| climate change.
| ramary wrote:
| Thanks for offering your perspective on this. Solving
| climate change is first about getting to net-zero GHG
| emissions, or as close as possible. There are many
| companies working to reduce the release of CO2 and CO2
| equivalents across different segments of the economy, from
| ag to construction to transportation. Many are focusing on
| developing and deploying alternative energies and capture
| technologies, which are great and needed. Our approach is
| to reduce the CO2 and equivalent emissions produced by O&G
| today. This is different from the mainstream viewpoint for
| sure, but especially in areas like methane venting (see
| links in my other comments) there is a large opportunity
| for immediate impact.
| chmod775 wrote:
| That's almost at the other end of the spectrum compared to what
| this site promises to deliver.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| The oil & gas industry likes to gaslight (ha) people into
| thinking they're fighting climate change, but it's a bizarre
| doublethink endeavour and they're mainly doing it for
| goodwill, government grants, and to levy more costs to the
| eventual consumers while reducing their own costs.
| VieEnCode wrote:
| Indeed, and when oil producing assets become increasingly
| stranded in the markets, the industry will not simply
| retire them at a loss. They will be sold on to buyers who
| face less regulatory oversight.
|
| When the oil companies are finally out of the hydrocarbon
| game, they will have built their platform upon the biggest
| set of externalised costs in history, and their old assets
| will still be polluting in new hands.
| Tomminn wrote:
| Oh, they're making the world a better place [0].
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRUAJVKlUZQ
| lvturner wrote:
| Is there any way I can submit a job to this?
| tndl wrote:
| Just send me an email (click on feedback on the site)
| throwaway210401 wrote:
| Looks cool. Where do you source these jobs from? How do you make
| sure to update these frequently.
| tndl wrote:
| It's very manual for now, I used hn who is hiring posts and
| companies I found during my last job search that are still
| hiring. Now the at I see a real interest in this I'll put some
| more work towards more sources and frequent updates.
| Mortiffer wrote:
| The idea is good, but some other features are needed, like a
| description of the role and of the company, showing why they are
| a good fit for the goodjobs page. It could be interesting as well
| to be able to apply for the jobs directly from goodjobs instead
| of being send elsewhere, and why not having a bookmark feature to
| see where you already applied / what positions or companies
| you're interested in
| barry-cotter wrote:
| https://80000hours.org/job-board/
|
| > This board lists publicly advertised vacancies that we think
| could help those with the right fit have a positive impact. Some
| of these roles help tackle some of the world's most pressing
| problems, while others help people build the career capital they
| might need to have a big impact later.
|
| > Visit our user guide & FAQ to better understand why we list
| these roles and to learn about how to make the best use of this
| board. If you're new to 80,000 Hours, read our key ideas series
| for our current take on how to think about careers that have a
| positive impact.
| heavyset_go wrote:
| I wanted to like that site, but it seems to equate real
| charities and non-profits that address issues that people
| actually face with nonsense like MIRI.
|
| I would absolutely love a site like 80,000 Hours that _wasn 't_
| tainted by a weird nerd ideology addressing paranoid fears of a
| malignant AGI.
| lupire wrote:
| No one but you has the exact same notion of "worthy" as you.
| tndl wrote:
| This was the main inspiration! I noticed they don't update too
| frequently, and I was mostly interested in engineering specific
| positions + startups which they have less of overall
| mushufasa wrote:
| How is this differentiated from https://techjobsforgood.com
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-19 23:02 UTC)