A links roundup examining various scientific studies, social developments, and historical findings, with a particular focus on recent research about confounding variables and replication issues in science. Longer summary

This is an extensive links post covering various scientific studies, news items, and interesting facts. Scott discusses several studies about confounding variables and replication in science, historical findings about ancient civilizations, new research on topics ranging from climate change to criminology, and various social and political developments. The post starts with methodological concerns in science, moves through various research findings and historical tidbits, and ends with news about ongoing projects and obituaries. The tone is analytical but casual, with Scott often adding his own commentary and pointing out interesting implications or contradictions. Shorter summary

Scott shares and comments on various links covering topics like startups, science, academia, social issues and charitable giving, with a focus on rationalist and effective altruist causes. Longer summary

This is a links post collecting various interesting articles and news from around the internet. Topics include a startup betting on marriage success, privacy/encryption history, climate change policy, scientific studies on aging and obesity, academic criticism, college renaming controversies, drug use surveys, and charitable giving. The post has Scott's typical style of briefly summarizing each link while adding his own commentary and connections between topics. The post ends with several charitable giving opportunities related to rationalist and effective altruist organizations. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander provides evidence that many prominent AI researchers are concerned about AI risk, contrary to claims in some popular articles. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to articles claiming that AI researchers are not concerned about AI risk by providing a list of prominent AI researchers who have expressed concerns about the potential risks of advanced AI. He argues that there isn't a clear divide between 'skeptics' and 'believers', but rather a general consensus that some preliminary work on AI safety is needed. The post highlights that the main differences lie in the timeline for AI development and when preparations should begin, not whether the risks are real. Shorter summary