Scott Alexander reviews the results of the Impact Market Mini-Grants test run, discussing the top projects and lessons learned about this novel charitable funding method. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reports on the results of the Impact Market Mini-Grants, a novel way of running charitable grants where investors fund promising projects and grantmakers buy credit for successes. The test run involved 18 forecasting-related projects, with judges assessing their final value. Most projects lost money for investors, but a few were highly successful. Scott discusses the top five projects, including a rationality education program at the University of Maryland, a forecasting tournament, a tool for making Kelly-optimal bets, a paper on forecasting long-term impacts, and an ambitious impact assessment project in India. He reflects on the lessons learned from this experiment, noting both successes and challenges in implementing the impact market concept. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander discusses the technical implementation details of impact markets for charity funding, exploring various options and challenges. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the technical implementation details of impact markets for charity funding. He discusses various options for structuring the market, pricing certificates, handling founder equity, and addressing legal and ethical concerns. The post examines different approaches to kickstarting such a market, considers potential investors and funders, and concludes with some hybrid design proposals to balance competing interests. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander reveals that Lewis Carroll had conceived an idea similar to retroactive public goods funding in 1894, predating modern reinventions of the concept. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the concept of retroactive public goods funding, highlighting its multiple independent inventions under different names. He then reveals that Lewis Carroll, the author of 'Alice in Wonderland', had actually conceived a similar idea in his 1894 book 'Sylvie and Bruno'. The post includes a lengthy quote from Carroll's book describing a system where professors are examined and rewarded at the end of their careers, with tradesmen essentially funding their lives in the interim based on their potential future success. Scott points out how this system closely resembles modern concepts of retroactive public goods funding, with the main difference being the lack of financialization of the tradesmen's role. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that media criticism of Silicon Valley based on products like Juicero ignores the significant innovative and altruistic work being done in the tech hub. Longer summary

Scott Alexander criticizes the media's portrayal of Silicon Valley as being solely focused on frivolous products like the Juicero juicer. He argues that while such products exist, they are not representative of the majority of Silicon Valley's work. He provides examples of important and innovative projects in areas like medical research, renewable energy, and space exploration. Alexander analyzes Y Combinator and Andreessen Horowitz portfolios to show that most startups are focused on serious business solutions or altruistic goals. He theorizes that people's perception of Silicon Valley is influenced by their own interests and experiences, leading to different views of what the tech hub 'does'. He concludes by arguing that Silicon Valley's mistakes are less harmful than those of other influential sectors, and that its capacity for innovation should be appreciated and protected. Shorter summary