this is mostly likely ⚠️ extremely ahistorical ⚠️ but anyway here's what it looks like when you take those rows and project them back into the past
other donors are kept as a constant % of non-billionaires
on top of this crypto donors are ÷10 before 2020 and ÷100 before 2017
nice to see that Ziz is living the maoist dream: stabbing landlords with samurai swords[1]
[1]: https://mobile.twitter.com/jessi_cata/status/1593783526859603970
(note that the above is not strictly true: her *friend* stabbed the landlord, but I was willing to overlook that detail for snappiness)
I believe that in effective altruism, deciding where funds are redirected by classic one-person-gets-one-vote methods would be hugely misguided. leading to coalitions appropriating resources, working against specialization etc. not against funders trying better mechanisms to elicit local knowledge, but applause-lighting “democracy” ain't gonna cut it
I operate by Crocker's rules[1].