Samuel Hammond
Article
Samuel Hammond is a recurring person in the Astral Codex Ten archive, appearing 4 times across 4 issues between February 22, 2022 and April 21, 2025. The archive places it in contexts such as “A big new study of lower-income children (h/t Samuel Hammond)”; “Samuel Hammond: Ninety-five theses on AI”; “Samuel Hammond (pro-Trump)“. It most often appears alongside ACX, Anthropic, Australia.
Metadata
- Category: People
- Mention count: 4
- Issue count: 4
- First seen: February 22, 2022
- Last seen: April 21, 2025
Appears In
Related Pages
-
- ACX (2 shared issues)
-
- Anthropic (2 shared issues)
-
- Australia (2 shared issues)
-
- Bentham’s Bulldog (2 shared issues)
-
- Brooklyn (2 shared issues)
-
- FDA (2 shared issues)
-
- Google (2 shared issues)
-
- Israel (2 shared issues)
-
- Michael Wiebe (2 shared issues)
-
- New York Times (2 shared issues)
-
- OpenAI (2 shared issues)
-
- Russia (2 shared issues)
External Links
Source Context
Recovered passages from the original issue text. When the raw archive preserved outbound links inside the source passage, they are listed directly under the quote.
9: Most previous studies of preschool found zero to negative effects on academic achievement, but potentially positive effects on nonacademic outcomes like discipline and grit. A big new study of lower-income children (h/t Samuel Hammond) confirms negative effects on academic achievement but also finds negative effects on non-academic outcomes. I have yet to look at it closely enough to have a good theory of what’s going on here, or whether parents should be trying to keep their kids out of preschool.
Inline links: big new study
30: Samuel Hammond: Ninety-five theses on AI. I’m so used to terrible AI takes by now that I was pretty shocked to see how good these mostly were.
Inline links: Ninety-five theses on AI
45: Debating which candidate has better policies seems so almost comical these days - isn’t everyone already sure which candidate is an ontologically-evil commie Nazi, and which is a bold hero riding in to save the Union? Still, a few people have taken on this thankless task, most notably Richard Hanania for Trump and Jeff Maurer for Harris. The most compelling pro-Trump argument is that Harris endorses some utterly idiotic economic policies (eg price controls) that could make everyone poorer and (if doubled down upon) knock the US into corrupt perma-stagnation like the worse parts of Europe, and these are so comically bad that they should override Harris’ advantages in other areas. But Maurer argues that even sticking to economics (Trump’s relatively non-crazy area), once you add up Trump’s proposed tariffs, threats to Fed independence, and NIMBYism he doesn’t look any better than Harris here - and then he loses on the non-economic and character issues. And Bentham’s Bulldog (pro-Harris) and Samuel Hammond (pro-Trump) make cases of their own within a more specifically EA framework around existential risks, etc.
Samuel Hammond and the Foundation for American Innovation are launching a conservative AI policy fellowship. “A six week educational fellowship for DC policy professionals interested in AI policy.”