Rob Wiblin

And then I think I could imagine down the line something like even just having separate accounting for like

the rest of our grant making versus grant making that is going towards paying for AIs for our grantees.

We already pay for like ChatGPT Pro subscriptions and like ChatGPT API credits for tons and tons of grantees.

I think just making it a bit more salient in our minds,

what fraction of our giving is going towards that?

And do we endorse its size?

And is there any place where we should be going bigger?

And are we on track?

Is the percentage climbing the way we think it should be?

Does that seem in line with the way AI capabilities are climbing?

Are we on track to, if we think crunch time is gonna start in six years, are we on track to have inference compute be a large fraction of our spending at that time?

Oh, totally.

I mean, I think this is a very natural institutional.

I think even beyond just being scared of making a mistake on this front, it's just that organizations have particular ways they do things.

And there's processes.

And right now, OpenPhil's process for grant making looks like usually someone fairly junior

gets an opportunity come across their desk, either through one of our open calls or through some contact they have.

And that junior person pulls together some materials to convince their manager it's a good fit.

And then that manager sort of convinces someone higher up that it's a good fit.

And you can have two layers or three layers or sometimes four layers of information cascading up