MIRI location optimization (and related topics) discussion

I feel pretty bad about both of your current top two choices (Bellingham or Peekskill) because they seem too far from major cities. I worry this distance will seriously hamper your ability to hire good people, which is arguably the most important thing MIRI needs to be able to do. [Speaking personally, not on behalf of Open Philanthropy.]

Update: After a lot more discussion and thinking things over, MIRI has decided against relocating away from the Bay Area, unless a new impetus comes along to move some time in the future.

Mainly, ongoing/propagating strategic updates are behind this decision. We're more uncertain about our strategy overall following our 2020 strategy update (https://intelligence.org/2020/12/21/2020-updates-and-strategy/#3), so we’d rather not pay a big up-front move cost based on a prediction about what we expect MIRI to look like 2 or 5 years from now. Related to the same strategic updates, over the next 12 months or so we plan to experiment with placing less of an emphasis on staff working from our Berkeley base, and expect some staff to live and work from other places. 

Separately, in the background, considerations against our recent favorite places became stronger:

• Bellingham is far away from big cities, and it seemed increasingly like MIRI would be more isolated there than we wanted. Also, we became more concerned about low light levels during winter months.
• The area around Peekskill has some of the highest Lyme disease incidence in the US, and it seems possible this is a high enough risk of disability to cause us to want to avoid it. We were still investigating this when we ended our location search.

Who am I? I’m a MIRI board member, and was in recent months leading/coordinating this MIRI relocation decision process, which is now complete. 

Thanks for all the feedback in these comments, in emails, and on Facebook. I (and probably others) read all of it I could find, and it was important input for us.

RE the NY site, in my experience from living in upstate NY for a time, an hour (or 75min) to Grand Central doesn't seem to match what people think of when they think of "an hour+ to NYC"; it's much worse. When I hear "an hour to NYC" I think "an hour to get to my destination", but if it's "an hour (or 75min) to Grand Central" it's likely at least 1.5-2hrs to my destination, perhaps even 2-2.5, with additional subjective hassle from getting to the train upstate, getting out of Grand Central, and transferring to the subway + walking or uber.  Plus, you are limited to making the trip while trains are running (so, no late-night hangouts then sleeping in your own bed). 

I personally like Austin, and selfishly I would want MIRI to be either near there or near NYC. I'm not really sure how good a fit it is for MIRI, but here are my thoughts on it.

Sanity/culture:

I think the overall epistemic climate in Austin is probably better than the Bay Area, but it still seems to be absorbing a lot of the illiberal, mostly left thing that's going around lately. Still, I've always found it easy to meet people there who are reasonably sane and not easily blown around by the political winds of the day. There is plenty of grey tribe culture around, and people there are more familiar with red tribe culture than in CA, but it is still mostly pretty progressive.

Weather:

A very common concern about Austin is the hot weather. While I do think it's something that needs to be dealt with, I do not think it is all that bad, as weather goes. Most people who visit find it terrible, even after a week or two, but during the 10-ish years I lived there, I can only remember meeting maybe five people who, having lived there for more than a year, would strongly avoid going outside due to the heat all summer, two of which seemed to be substantially unhappy for it. Of everyone else, my estimate of the breakdown is:

• 25% dislike the hot weather, maybe at the level of planning vacations to get away from it, but otherwise didn't seem strongly affected by it
• 60% would prefer cooler weather, and avoid things like running or cycling during the hot part of the day, but otherwise seem perfectly fine with it
• 15% actually enjoy the hot weather, at least on the not-super-hot days, would go for 80 mile bike rides in it, etc

The sample here is maybe 50% UT students, plus some cyclists, effective altruists, rationalists, and others, mostly between roughly 20 and 40 years old, and mostly from out of state. At least half of the people who really like hot weather are competitive cyclists.

An important thing to keep in mind about Austin is that, unlike the Bay Area, almost every building that holds humans has air conditioning, so it really is only an outside thing. The evenings are great and you never have carry a jacket between May-ish and October-ish. Overall, I don't get the impression that people find the hot Austin summers more bothersome than a typical winter in a place that gets snow.

Here are things that I personally like about Austin:

• The LessWrong and EA community is strong. There are reliable meetups multiple times per week with interesting and fun people. Personally, I found them to result in, on average, more interesting conversations than meetups in the Bay Area.
• It has a great live music scene, most of which is cheap (<$10) or free, and which is a mix small shows in crowded bars and huge concerts in the park in the summer.
• SXSW is is neat. There are lots of music shows, talks, film screenings, and exhibits, a substantial portion of which do not require registration or a badge or anything. It is very crowded and makes it hard to get around the city for a couple weeks. For me this was fine because I like meeting strangers and transportation via bike isn't all that strongly impacted, but for many people who live in the city it is very, very annoying.
• The food is good in general, and there are lots of good vegan/vegetarian options. Better grocery stores than other places I've lived
• It has a great cycling scene, for everything from casual recreational riding to serious competitive cycling.
• You can get in a tube to float down the river and get so engrossed in conversation that you don't notice you've just been circling around an eddy for the last 40 minutes.

Here are things I do not like about Austin:

• Sometimes getting around is hard. You can reliably get an Uber at more-or-less any time, but traffic gets quite bad during rush hour, on game days, during SXSW, etc. It's decent, but not great for getting around on a bike, but traffic is getting worse, driving culture is getting more aggressive, and the city engineers or whoever designs infrastructure do not seem very competent to me
• There's enough of the illiberal-left culture to be a problem sometimes. The protests/riots there were kind of bad, though very contained. The university and many of its students have very little tolerance for divergent views on many political topics. It's not too hard to avoid unpleasant encounters, but I don't feel entirely at ease discussing certain things in public or with people I do not know well
• It is not that great for most of my preferred kind of outdoor activities. There are no proper mountains nearby and none of the parks is big enough for a solid 3+ night backpacking trip. Big Bend is great, but it's 7hrs away.

Other thoughts:

I do not think Austin feels all that calm, quiet, or close to nature. It will become more crowded, traffic will get worse, and rent will go up, but that's partly (mostly?) because smart/interesting people are moving there. The quietest neighborhoods are not bad, and depending on what you're willing to pay, there are some beautiful places to live there. If you're looking for places near Austin, but out of the city, I think Dripping Springs, Georgetown, New Braunfels/Gruene, Waco, and Wimberley seem nice. The Texas Hill Country has some great places to rent a cabin and actually get away from all the people/noise for a while.

The target for researchers to "be able to think unusually clearly" personally pushes towards the Bellingham location. That sort of semi-isolation in, for me, one of the most beautiful regions in the US is highly conducive to focused thought.

Although, I think it trades off with other potential goals, for example: community expansion or access to power. Those of you in miri know better where you are on timeline but research institute in the woods feels like it optimizes for a very particular move and may leave you less flexibility if the game isn't in the state you imagine.  As noted, I lack the information to know whether that's a good or bad bet.

If you prefer a more flexible approach, I'd consider one of the new or old tech hubs: Austin being an example of the former, Boston the latter. Both seem in some ways to be more future oriented than the bay which sadly feels like it's being consumed by a hustler/MBA ethos rather than a creative one. Also, perhaps consider hubs focused around next-gen industries such as biotech (Boston again or maybe San Diego) as there's just a difference in cultural dynamism as opposed to locations very much in exploit mode.

Finally, if you're still considering moving the community en masse, as discussed in the earlier posts, the only communities I can think of that have successfully done that have not left by choice. While in two minutes of thought I haven't come up with a way to drive the rationalists from the bay without physical risk or legal jeopardy, that does not mean it can't be done. Short of that, schisms can do wonders for motivation.

Background: I am a full-time student at Bellingham's (unimpressive) university who has lived in the Bellingham area and will soon be moving back as classes resume in person. My partner is also an AI safety researcher (previously from the Bay area) who would certainly be interested in building AI research and rationalist community here.  

Notes on Bellingham:

• Yes, there is a much stronger Uber presence during non-COVID times. The absence of students living in Bellingham has impacted rideshares here and will likely pick up again when in-person classes return. However, few rideshare alternates. There are longer wait times than what you would normally experience in most metropolitan areas, but you can get a lift most nights of the week within city limits.
• Bellingham's nature, outdoor activities, restaurants, community, and culture are excellent. There are small music, arts, and dance scenes here that are quite pleasant and intimate. A great way to connect with locals. People are relaxed and friendly. It's not difficult to feel at home here. As I like to say Bellingham is small enough that you will always run into someone you know and big enough that you can always meet someone new. Very few people want to leave this area and many make career compromises in order to stay in Bellingham.
• Excellent place for fungophiles and outdoor enthusiasts. Mushroom hunting is a popular activity here in the PNW which an abundance of fruiting bodies in the fall. Bellingham hosts an annual Ski to Sea race that combines skiing, biking, and kayaking. There is a community boating center in Bellingham that offers access to kayaks, paddleboards, sailboats, and more at an affordable rental cost. Easy access to Bellingham Bay, the Chuckanut Mts right outside of town, Whatcom Falls, and the Cascades Mts within an hour. Mt. Baker nearby is perfect for those who enjoy snow sports in the Winter.  Also close to the San Juan Islands accessible by ferry, another incredible outdoor area to camp and explore.
• Most people leave due to the lack of job opportunities here in Bellingham. Finding jobs for partners, colleagues, and friends could be quite challenging. This would be the biggest drawback of the area IMO along with low salaries. Though at this time many companies have shifted to create more remote work opportunities than in previous years and may continue this trend.
• Low-cost rentals and properties are a big plus, as well as beautiful pieces of land for sale (some with existing structures) in the area surrounding Bellingham that would make for great campus options. Whatcom County is a gorgeous place to live.  A quick craigslist search for rentals yielded studios for under a $1,000, $1,500-1,800 for a 2 bedroom, $1700-2,800 for 3-4 bedrooms, and up to $4,000 for houses with 5-7 bedrooms. This could be helpful for those relocating to the area. Keep in mind that rental availability generally follows the academic year here in Bellingham. The median sale price for a home in Bellingham is appx. 537K at present, and property values are increasing quickly in this area.
• There are a number of small spiritual communities including a Unitarian church, several Christian churches, an Islamic Mosque, and the Center for Spiritual Living. There is also the Red Cedar Zen Center, Mindfulness Northwest, Bellingham Insight, and the Shambala Center for those interested in meditation practice. The closest Sikh temple is in Lynden, WA.
• This little city is expected to grow a lot over the next 20 years. Bellingham's population is increasing quickly as more relocate to this area.
• The projected job growth rate is 41.7% according to Bellingham, Washington Economy (bestplaces.net) which also includes more information about taxes, jobs, and earning potential.
• Close to Seattle and Vancouver airports great for most domestic and international flights. Flights from Seattle to the Bay area are quite affordable making frequent trips doable. Vancouver is an excellent option especially for international flights which are often cheaper than Seattle when the border is open (which has been closed due to COVID).
• The potential to build a rationalist community between Seattle and Vancouver is high. There is a minimal presence compared to the Bay area- yet many people in these areas have similarly aligned interests and values. There are people here who would be interested in this community if a presence was established.

I hope some of this information is helpful. Bellingham is a beautiful community that many love to call home. Wishing you great fortune in your search for the right place.

Shekinah Alegra Schell

Moved this comment to a google doc due to the formatting issues: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tq9rY1TCs49XHckWtzOowYz_xHXFnRpOZq8r0lE5JSQ/edit#heading=h.cywpygwwkhbl

↑ comment by Malcolm Collins (malcolm-collins) · 2021-05-14T11:24:38.591Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Replies from: malcolm-collins

↑ comment by Malcolm Collins (malcolm-collins) · 2021-05-14T11:25:05.008Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Replies from: malcolm-collins

↑ comment by Malcolm Collins (malcolm-collins) · 2021-05-14T11:25:29.990Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Replies from: malcolm-collins

↑ comment by Malcolm Collins (malcolm-collins) · 2021-05-14T11:25:55.885Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Replies from: malcolm-collins

↑ comment by Malcolm Collins (malcolm-collins) · 2021-05-14T11:26:12.906Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Replies from: malcolm-collins

↑ comment by Malcolm Collins (malcolm-collins) · 2021-05-14T11:26:40.037Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Replies from: malcolm-collins

↑ comment by Malcolm Collins (malcolm-collins) · 2021-05-14T11:26:58.127Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Replies from: malcolm-collins

↑ comment by Malcolm Collins (malcolm-collins) · 2021-05-14T11:27:15.480Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Replies from: Douglas_Knight

↑ comment by Douglas_Knight · 2022-04-15T15:33:31.685Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Where did you get this graphic?

The thing that seemed most crazy to me was DC, which I was shocked to find is correct.

But the international list is crazy. 3 in Russia? 2 in Japan? 1 in France? 

Some random thoughts...

Cities With Variety

Model: major cities (like Austin or NYC) are fun to live in without belonging to a relatively close-knit community. This is much less the case for most other places. As a result, there's a big difference between Austin/NYC area vs the other top-5 options. Austin and NYC are both places I'd be happy to move to on their own merits; they're fun places to live even without a small community to be with. If a hub started to form in such a place, 80% I'd move there pretty quickly. I'd still be happy with the other top-5 places (>50% I'd move there), but that's more conditional on rationalist community formation. I expect Southern NH or Bellingham or even Reno would be pretty boring without the community.

Unpacking this model a bit more... Austin or NYC are big enough that there's lots of stable sub-communities, like stable communities for various immigrant groups, or groups around various hobbies like dancing or makerspaces. That creates a lot of cultural variety, e.g. in food options, and makes it likely that whatever particular thing you're interested in is represented - like blues/swing dance for me.

Freedom to Build Things

Another model: living in less-dense areas seems to make people independently-do-things more. Making radvac [LW · GW] is a good example; living in less-dense places seems to induce a mindset which makes that sort of project more likely to happen. Here's a completely made-up story about why this happens, based on having lived in both high-density and low-density places myself: suppose one day the build-something mood strikes me, and I want to go make a trebuchet. In a lower-density place, with a few acres of land around the house, I can just go out in the backyard and do that. (I grew up low-density, and did this sort of thing pretty regularly as a teenager.) In the middle of San Francisco, the project is entirely out of the question; the only way to do it within the city at all would probably involve getting a bunch of permits and buy-in from lots of people. In between those two extremes, if I live in an apartment complex with some space out back, I can probably build the thing, but I'll want to be careful about bothering the neighbors (e.g. with loud powertools).

From personal experience, this sort of thing happens a lot. There's all sorts of stuff which would be fun to just-go-build in the backyard if I had a few acres and my own house, but which I probably won't build at all in a city. And that feeds back on how one thinks about making things: in a place where building-a-thing requires buy-ins and permits, the default mental reaction to "I'd like to build a Thing" becomes "I need to get buy-in and permission", rather than "I need to run to the store for supplies".

Yudkowsky sometimes says there's things which we think of in the same category as going to the store to buy milk, and then there's everything else. Living in low-density places tends to make building-things live more in the category of going to the store to buy milk. It creates an affordance for independent action and building things.

Upshot of all this: MIRI's already looking for a place near nature with hiking trails and whatnot. I think low density has important mental benefits in its own right; just having dense housing near a nature reserve is not as good as having low-density housing. This argues more in favor of the more-remote areas.

Cars

There's already some comments here about needing a car as a downside. I think having a car and a license has some not-very-legible but very valuable benefits to one's mindset. It's similar to the previous section: having a car creates an affordance for going places, whenever and wherever one wants. I think the very large majority of people who have not ever had a car/license drastically underestimate the value of this affordance - i.e. I'd expect that if such people did get a car and license, >90% would think in hindsight that they drastically underestimated the value. (I've seen this happen to my girlfriend.)

My main message here is for people who have never had a car/license: there is a large illegible value here which you are probably underestimating, and I strongly recommend that you don't rule out places just because they require a car.

I'd love to make a strong pitch for New Hampshire. There are a ton of people who are ideologically aligned with MIRI in the state. Taxes are low — there's no income tax or sales tax, and the state is actually lowering what business taxes exist. Cost of living is very modest. Boston is a relatively doable drive, providing access to a major international airport and a number of well known universities, and Dartmouth is in state. The state has a low intervention, libertarianish political ethos, and people are quite tolerant. The populace is also reasonably well educated by US standards, and the standard of living is similarly quite high by national standards.

I understand that finding an appropriate parcel of land would be important to the project, but right now the real estate market is very temporarily crazy because of people fleeing Boston during the pandemic; it is likely to cool down soon. I suspect that any one of a number of professionals and amateurs might be willing to help MIRI find a suitable location in any case.

In terms of natural beauty and quiet, the state has a lot to offer. We're currently living on a dirt road in a small town in the southern part of the state where I regularly take multi-mile walks to clear my head. The views both from our (very affordable) home and along the road are fantastic, and the natural surroundings here are the rival of any other place I've ever visited. I've seen a lot of the state over the years, and one of the reasons we picked NH was that it's very pretty.

In terms of safety, most of my neighbors, in both towns I have lived in, leave their doors unlocked. Crime is exceptionally rare in most of the state. (It is so different in this regard that takes quite a while for a person who is used to dangerous urban environments to get used to it.)

I'm happy to talk to people about the advantages of New Hampshire in other contexts.

I would also like to make a pitch against New York City and the surrounding areas. I was a life-long New Yorker until recently, and I love the place, but the problems of New York City (and the state as a whole) are not very different in the end from those of California. I think NYC is in for a decade or two of decline unless there's a radical change in the local political culture which is unlikely to occur.

Conflict of interest disclaimer: I live in NYC and think bringing MIRI here would be good for our local community

I would point out that being an hour by train from the city is significantly closer than an hour by car.  An hour by train is an hour of relaxation or productive work (your choice), whereas an hour by car is an hour lost.  An hour by train is also reliably an hour, whereas an hour by car puts your schedule at the mercy of traffic.  Finally, an hour by train is accessible to everyone, whereas an hour by car requires possessing a car, being proficient in its use, and being confident of your ability to focus for the entire ride.

Apart from transit, I'd urge you to take weather seriously.  I lived near Seattle for two years, and going without sunlight for months at a time drained me.  (Going without proper storms messed with me too, but that's probably just me.)  I'm told working at MIRI, staring into how doomed we are on a daily basis, can be depressing. Best not to combine those.

I'll also say that I have more confidence in New York's cultural future.  It's hard to estimate the risk that Seattle will develop anti-epistemic happy death spirals like San Fransisco did.  If I had to handwave it, I'd say 30% within the next 10 years.  NYC's sheer size and internal diversity give it cultural inertia.  Odds of something like that happening here I'd put below 1%.

I don't think anyone has mentioned Oxford, UK yet? It's tiny. You could literally live on a farm here and still be 5-10 minutes from the city centre. And obviously it's a realistic place for a rationalist hub. I haven't perceived anti-tech sentiment here but haven't paid attention either.

I am a current PhD student in Pittsburgh and grew up just north of Bellingham. I like it here a lot, and think it fits most of your criteria. It should not necessarily be your #1 pick, but I think it's a mistake that it's not on the list at all. 

AMA, but, for starters:
 - affordability. Pittsburgh is cheap. It is cheaper than Detroit, but somehow nicer. I own a house as a PhD student and that is not terribly unusual. (I do not know anything about the property market for an entire campus, though.)
 - pleasant environment as a research scientist. I bike to my office through a beautiful 400 acre park. The city is eminently walkable and I don't own a car. It's not as pretty as the Puget Sound (which is exceptional), but the city is in a forest-hill-river ecosystem and there are more than enough places to go on contemplative bike rides, trail walks, etc. There are a bunch of other technically minded people in the city who are interesting to talk to, although it is of course smaller than Boston or the Bay Area. 
 - positive culture/governance. My sense is that the political climate here tends pragmatist and positive-sum. Overall it feels sane here, and while the city has some genuine problems, it feels like the trend line for the future is optimistic, and I don't worry that the city's leadership will get sucked into deranged nonsense in the near- or long-term. Suffice to say this is sort of notable for this country.
- lower X risk. there are no natural disasters worse than the occasional snowstorm. It is supposedly the least disaster-prone major city in the US, and was almost chosen as a location for Alcor on this basis. The long-term prognosis for climate change is that the area will eventually have the weather of, say, Nashville or Atlanta today. 

A potentially serious disadvantage of the Peekskill area, especially for outdoorsy or rural-life-enjoying rationalists, is that it’s tick country.

I looked into this more: Peekskill Lyme Incidence [LW · GW]

Strongly suggest southern New Hampshire.

My grandparents are from Peekskill, I've lived most of my life in NYC, and spent the year before last in the Bay. 

southern New Hampshire is close to very high end small towns like Exeter and Portsmouth. It's is somewhat reminiscent of the structure of the South Bay, but with a very New England feel. Peekskill is much more run down in comparison.

I can't speak to Bellingham, but in as much as you are interested in Peekskill or a non urban setting, southern New Hampshire is an extremely good choice.

Would be eager to help you gather more info about it.

Empire State of Mind

I want to second Daniel and Zvi's recommendation of New York culture as an advantage for Peekskill. An hour away from NYC is not so different from being in NYC — I'm in a pretty central part of Brooklyn and regularly commute an hour to visit friends uptown or further east in BK and Queens. An hour in traffic sucks, an hour on the train is pleasant. And being in NYC is great. 

A lot of the Rationalist-adjacent friends I made online in 2020 have either moved to NYC in the last couple of months or are thinking about it, as rents have dropped up to 20% in some neighborhoods and everyone is eager to rekindle their social life. New York is also a vastly better dating market for male nerds given a slightly female-majority sex ratio and thousands of the smartest and coolest women on the planet as compared to the male-skewed and smaller Bay Area.  

Peekskill is also 2 hours from Philly and 3 from Boston, which is not too much for a weekend trip. That could make it the Schelling point for East Coast megameetups/conferences/workshops since it's as easy to get to as NYC and a lot cheaper to rent a giant AirBnB in.

Won't Someone Think of the Children

I love living in Brooklyn, but the one thing that could make us move in the next year or two is a community of my tribe that are willing to help each other with childcare, from casual babysitting to homeschooling pods. I'm keenly following the news of where Rationalist groups are settling, especially those who plan to (like us) or already have kids. A critical mass of Rationalist parents in Peekskill may be enticing enough for us to move there, since we could have the combined benefits of living space, proximity to NYC, and the community support we would love.

I'm glad this topic came up. I'm planning on taking the next year to explore different locations and the following year to buy a house, so it's been on my mind. Here are some thoughts:

• I've found it useful to watch these Driving Tour of City X videos on YouTube.
• I sense I'm in the minority here, but I really am not a fan of cars due to the tail risk of death. In 2018, there were 11.18 deaths per 100k people, or a 0.01118% chance of dying. If you value life at $10M, 0.0001118 * $10,000,000 = $1,118. I could see the convenience of cars outweighing this cost. But, a) a MIRI researcher is having a hugely positive impact on humanity, and so the value of their life, I would argue, is many orders of magnitude larger than a standard life. And b), if you think there's a decent chance of humans figuring out life extension, I think that means life is way more valuable than the standard $10M. Eg. $200k/year * 50 years gives you a value of $10M, but if you think there's a 10% chance of eg. the singularity happening and that leading to an extra 100k years of life, now we're talking about an expectation of something like 10k years. And those are years that hopefully will be really, really awesome to be a part of. (I haven't even started factoring in the cost of injuries, or the fact that cars are expensive.)
• Historically, my thoughts on this have flip flopped, but right now I sense that there is a lot of value in having good weather. I used to think, "What's the difference? Most people spend a ton of time indoors anyway." But on the other hand, I sense that being outdoors has some really nice benefits for cognition and mood, and that you should try to spend a lot of time outside. Also, if you accept my argument against cars, you'll need good weather so walking/biking isn't too unpleasant. Unfortunately, in most locations, you'll either have to deal with temperatures that are too hot during the summer, or too cold during the winter (or both). The pacific northwest and California seem to be the only options for weather you can be outside comfortably year round. Unfortunately, PNW has a lack of sunlight, and California is expensive. I'm personally leaning towards the PNW, but I want to do some more research into the sunlight issue first. Anyone know how big a deal it is?
• Something I've been thinking about is the extent to which you could really get by without a car if you don't live in a "real city". Well, I should know the answer to this already. I've spent 10+ years living in Pittsburgh (college), Gainesville, Culver City, and Las Vegas (downtown, Summerlin, Winchester, and Henderson) all without having a car. I think it's worked out fine overall. I just worry that the inconvenience prevents me from doing things like going to the park or the gym when I otherwise would. On the other hand, there are non big city locations where most of what you need is pretty conveniently located. Eg. when I lived in Summerlin, I was a 5 minute walk away from a library, great restaurants and a movie theatre, and was a ~15 minute bike ride away from a grocery store, park, casino, outdoor mall, bike trail, and more. So maybe it's worth finding non big city locations like those.
• Right now I'm leaning towards Portland. It seems to be (one of?) the only place that checks all of the boxes: moderate weather, nature, walkable/bikable, legit restaurants (I hate when the only available options are chains), weed, tech friendly, things to do, and last but not least, not being too expensive. On Zillow it looks like there's some really solid options to buy between $250-400k. It seems like it could be a fit for MIRI's campus.

I'd like to note that Texas is passing strong restrictions on abortion. They've passed a "heartbeat bill" banning abortions after six weeks, and it seems likely that they'll pass a trigger bill outlawing abortion almost entirely, contingent on the Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade. 

I'm not a Supreme Court expert, but I know people who are sincerely worried about Roe v Wade being undone. This would be a pretty big deal breaker for my fiancée (and by extension myself). From what I read, the Supreme Court will make a Roe v Wade ruling in the middle of 2022.

Does this factor into your considerations? I feel like this would be a pretty big deal for the rationalist community at large.

I think southern NH (especially near Portsmouth) ticks a lot of your boxes here. Easy access to gorgeous walkable nature, very good legal and cultural climate, some fun little cities on the coast, very convenient bus access to Logan as well as Cambridge/the Red Line (I used to commute into MIT every day), a preexisting somewhat aligned cultural movement to tap into in the FSP, etc.

Honestly I think I could go down the list of priorities and make a case for each aspect but I think the best case to be made for the area comes in seeing it first hand. If anyone wanted to come see the region I can promise you'd have plenty of options for where to stay, people to meet, and places to see.

Potential metrics which may be helpful to consider (from a previous location search for me to live): Minimum sunlight per month, months under 200 hrs of sunlight, days above 90F, days below 32F, snow/rain days per year, violent crime level, property crime level, number of internet providers, average speed test result of internet providers, top advertised speed of internet providers, quality of healthcare, attends religious services at least once per week, rate of cigarette use, rate of alcohol use, rate of binge drinking.

Some of these are direct metrics on experience (ie number of days where climate makes being outside less pleasant), others towards the end of the list are more proxy metrics of concrete data that may give some indication of general level of religiosity/stress/need for escape in the local environment.

Given your described desiderata, I would think that a slightly more rural location along the coast of California ought to be up there. Large properties in Orinda are not that expensive (there are gorgeous 16-30 acre lots for about 1million on Zillow right now), and right now, for better and for worse, the Bay is the locus of the rationalist and EA communities and of the tech industry; convincing people to move to a pastoral retreat 1hour from the city everyone already lives in is a much easier sell and smoother transition than convincing them to move across the country. (I recognize that MIRI is doing this in part because of thinking that it's bad for the Bay to be that, but I think the Bay community already has at least four distinctive sub communities with different values and norms and priorities, and a campus in more-rural California could form a distinctive one while not disrupting all existing social bonds.) I know Bay zoning is notorious, but that's much less true as soon as you're out of the Bay proper, and all of those properties emphasize in the listings that you have total flexibility about what to build on that land. Other nearby properties are often also for sale. 

I worry that if MIRI moves to a place with no local rationalists or rationalist-inclined people, they'll be less likely to make new friends and more likely to become very insular, as the people who valued their non-MIRI relationships most fall away; it seems like a huge advantage if a move is either to a place with a preexisting rationalist community or doesn't require severing ties with the current ones.

The big downside of this, to my mind, would be fire, and it's a substantial downside, but on the whole I anticipate-success much more strongly for a rural-California enclave than for the locations you describe. (Disclaimer: this may be because I have strong roots in the Bay and am not personally likely to move.)

We recently moved to Reno, and I think it does better on some metrics than others.

It’s much more affordable and free to build if you want to do your own custom thing. Prices are rising a lot because folks are fleeing CA to move here, and that makes the locals unhappy (and could generate future tech blow back potentially), but being able to build more housing will eventually help. I could see traffic becoming an issue eventually, but right now there isn’t anywhere in the city that’s >30 drive away, which is mind blowing to me! Since it’s much easier to build here, and find large swaths of property (though securing water might be a bottleneck, need to look), I suspect you could buy a plot of land for MIRI and get a developer to custom build a campus and lots of housing.

I just checked Uber/Lyft and they’re very sparse. No idea if that’s pandemic-related. In general if you’re going to live anywhere outside a major city, you’ll have to have people willing to drive sometimes, period. We get other services like food delivery, etc, just fine. You might not get restaurants delivering if you’re really far away. (Note: others here have told me they don't have a problem with ridesharing, but I live on a ranch on the northern edge of the city, and I suspect that's more representative of a potential MIRI-type location.)

The local environment is high desert, which is to my liking but isn’t for everyone. However beautiful forested mountains are <1 hour drive away.

The state is purple and a swing state in national elections. I live on a ranch north of town, and folks seem like typical Mountain West - they are friendly, mind their own business, don’t push politics on people. It’s obviously far more liberal on certain dimensions (sex work is legal, gambling is legal, unlike other places). I get the sense that it’s very live and let live here. However the locals are very concerned about the large influx from CA causing the state to start voting for crazy laws (another source of possible future blowback). There is 0 income tax.

The main issue is that you’re not in proximity to a world class city (other than SF with a 4 hour drive). You’ll have to rely on flights to larger hubs for certain things. I think there’s a lot to be said for being 1 hour from a huge city.

I predict that the city will develop into a secondary tech hub in short order (years, not decades). Tesla already has the gigafactory here, for example, and some tech is already here. Tons of CA refugees have come here, and I suspect they’ll push to create a new hub instead of WFH indefinitely or moving back to SF.  Also lots of the Burner community lives here!

Repeating what many people have said, the Pacific Northwest is a terrible option for anyone with SAD.

For my tastes (abundant sunlight year round, low summer humidity with few ticks/mosquitos, four seasons, outstanding natural beauty), the Rocky Mountain region has the cities with the best physical environments in the US. I would probably recommend against Boulder. I lived/worked in Boulder for ~5 years and love the physical climate but not the intellectual climate, and the real estate market is awful. Fort Collins or Denver (my current city) would be better, but it still might be difficult to find cheap enough real estate for a large campus. 

Santa Fe, NM and Flagstaff, AZ would be my other picks for the Rocky Mountain region, better than the Montana options IMO. Similar physical environment and population size as Boulder, with cheaper real estate and a less repressive intellectual climate. The downside is airports. Santa Fe is a ~1 hour drive from Albuquerque, which will have few direct flights to/from major cities. Flagstaff's closest airport (Phoenix) is much busier with more direct flights, but further away (a ~2 hour drive from Flagstaff).

SLC and Boise are OK, but air pollution during the winter is very bad (with less sunlight than the other options), so I'd probably recommend against them. 

Two things to be cautious about re Bellingham:

1. the % 'overcast' incidence is much higher than the % 'measurable precipitation' incidence. I lived in the area until I was about 30 and the number of days when I literally never saw the sun, or a scrap of blue sky was very high, especially during the winter.  People with any tendency towards Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) should avoid Bellingham, indeed, the entire Pacific Northwest.  
2. Winters seem colder there than you would expect from the actual temperature.   Just like high humidity makes heat seem hotter, high humidity makes cold seem colder.   I've never heard anybody make the comment 'yes, but it is a dry cold..', but it does make a very noticeable difference.    

I live in Austin. I've lived a long time in North Austin, South Austin, and now I live in Travis Heights / SoCo. This was broken up by a 12 year stint in Bellevue, WA.

Some thoughts:

The I-35 corridor through downtown is not a great drive. If you live North of downtown, you'll tend to want to stay up there. If you live South, you'll tend to want to stay down there. In my mind, South of downtown (anywhere south/east/west as long as you don't have to commute through downtown) wins in the exchange. North Austin is a flat, uninspired land that more resembles Dallas in its uniformity. If you live North, you'll want to drive South for your entertainments. This means driving through the I-35 (or Mopac) chokepoints which will add time and lower happiness.

Mosquitoes can be handled with some oscillating fans (disrupts flight and oderants/co2 they use to track you). They'll still find you, but it can be managed. I haven't noticed much of a problem with them while out walking. Stationary outdoor talking/reading with no fans is more the problem.

The weather is very hot in August, but in trade you get an early end to winter and wonderful spring weather. Thunderstorms are rare, but powerful and inspiring. Winter is generally mild.

The fried chicken scene here is ace. 

Note that Texas BBQ is a beef and oak dominated ordeal, so you'll find a lot of brisket. We still serve up ribs, but unlike our cousins in Kansas City, the brisket is the artform and the rib takes a lesser role.

You won't find very much good Thai food or Indian food. Yes, there is some, but you aren't going to find it at quality for delivery. There is a little Sushi, but not as much as you'd expect. There is a lot of excellent Pho and Ramen. There is very little good Chinese.

There are a number of restaurants on the river. These aren't always the best in terms of food...but they are on the river and you can hang out and drink iced tea and watch the sun go below the tree line. That's good thinking.

On the front of thinking: something you might consider is the ability to drive to a camping location in Austin. There are a number of camping parks you could take a vehicle, tents, and people, and get away from the city and noise and just hang out and talk (or fish, or hunt). Driving to any of a number of nearby small towns with their own attractions and camping locations gives you lots of options.

Many, many people have nice outdoor areas at their homes for hanging out.

There is a nice public pool system. There are a few public springs. There are several outdoor and indoor waterparks not far. There are places for lazy river floats.

Texas wine country - such as it is - is also an hour away in Fredericksburg.

To me, Austin is surrounded by places to just go and think or read whether solo or with compatriots.

Finally, a warning. The food here is seriously good and quite rich and very cheap. You really do have to be careful about the quantity you eat. Everyone will want to feed you.

Gardening can be a challenge here. If you enjoy gardening it is doable, but water conservation rules, frequent droughts, and relentless sun exposure mean you'll need to be strategic and ... try things.

Nevermind

I spent about 9 months in Austin and would recommend against. Weather isn't all that great and the whole area seems to be getting worse/more California like from what I can tell even in the time I was there (a visitor from CA, haha). Traffic grinds the city to a stop twice a day as there are choke points over the river that aren't likely to be fixed.

The places I would consider are Boulder, Londonderry or Nashua, and Research Triangle Park. I think you'd be most likely to find relevant commercial properties in RTP.

The other high level consideration I have when considering locations is that the immediate area around the location is so important that you should airbnb some people within 5 minutes walking if at all possible to get an on the ground feel. My impression is that the felt sense of effort to going places is exponential with distance and not linear. So places 20 minutes away aren't twice the effort of 10 minutes away but more like 4 times the effort or something like that. This means places that look great from a distance vary hugely if you're 10 minutes away on this or that side of town depending on what's in the immediate area (<10 minutes walking).

In light of this, having a campus that is 15 minutes away from things is going to feel hugely different from being walking distance to a lively concourse as current offices are and the places I listed are places where you could be closer to a concourse. E.g. in Boulder the main concourse (Pearl St.) is also a few block from a river/nature trail that goes all the way out into dense forest and is quite nice.

If you go with Bellingham, will you be avoiding the tsunami inundation zone?

I've spent a lot of time in the outdoors and I'm surprised that "ticks" occupied such a large chunk of effort/relevance. Wear long pants/shirts with long sleeves when in the woods, check yourself after you get back, and put bug spray (there are certain brands that work) on your body and clothes. 

I'm curious what counts as "very high elevation" and why it's an issue. The highest cities of any size are Santa Fe, Denver and the Front Range (including Cheyenne), and SLC. You can get some very high elevations right outside Denver, but there are no towns above 10,500'and in practice there's very little over 8,000' or so. 

More information on Austin: 

Physical environment: the weather is generally nice October through April. May through September tends to be hot; it's neither the bone dry of Colorado and the desert Southwest nor the oppressive humidity of the coast. Not ideal but not terrible. I prefer cooler weather but find it tolerable to great most of the year. 

Really exciting, impactful outdoor activities like mountain climbing and backpacking are a schlep. Shorter hikes, biking, water, and outdoor sports are plentiful both in and outside the city. 

Because it's growing quickly, I would expect anywhere you find to be busier than it currently is in a few years. I'd look for an area that is currently less developed than would be ideal. Based on advertising, it seems like there's a lot of land waiting to be developed in the towns around Austin. In my experience, commuting against traffic works very well (leaving the city in the morning and returning to it in the evening). 

Getting around the city without a car is generally difficult. Mass transit is very poor, particularly if you set up anywhere outside the urban core. 

Cost: Austin isn't the Bay or NYC, but it's not what it was 10 years ago either. We have enough space to expand that it probably won't ever get that bad, but right now the housing market is absolutely ridiculous (if you're making a bid on a house, you have under 24 hours to come up with 45% over asking in cash, or don't bother, is the gist). Property taxes on residences are capped; not sure about organizations. If property tax in Austin proper is an issue, the surrounding area will likely be cheaper. There is no state income tax. 

Vibe: The city used to have a very laid-back atmosphere, but has grown a lot and attracted lots of companies, particularly in tech. Now it's more "casual but lots going on." I can't say I have any opinion on the general epistemic culture of any city, they all seem pretty similar to me on that front, except for the hyper-political ones, which Austin isn't (yet, at least). 

I believe crime is low to average. Getting a gun is relatively easy. The only politically motivated violence I can recall is from last summer, and that affected literally every one of the 100 largest cities in the country. Seems pretty LGBT friendly--like you would expect from any blue city. There are grumblings about tech companies driving prices up from long-time residents, but these never seem to translate into any policy issues. 

The rationalist community has been going strong for ~10 years; we currently have multiple weekly in-person meetups, a remote book club, and a remote monthly movie discussion. We have expanded both in numbers and activities over the pandemic. UT Austin is also located here, with many alumni staying in the area, and we get a large number of graduates from other Texas schools like A&M and Texas Tech, and a number of tech companies have recently moved in or expanded (including Facebook, Google, and Amazon). 

I live in Fort Collins, and I'd love for you to move here, but I doubt you'll find the property you want. I doubt there's any 20+ acre campuses for sale, and even if you found one it would be incredibly expensive (although, maybe cheaper than you expect if you're starting with SF prices as your baseline). You might be able to find a ranch or something for sale up in the mountains though? Although, I'm not sure if the amenities would work (hope you're signed up for Starlink).

Another downside is that the nearest (and only) big city is around an hour drive south, and Denver is a pretty lame city. And if you're in the mountains, Denver would probably be > 2 hours away.

Being near CSU might be useful for hiring new people, since we have a decent CS department and a complete lack of interesting jobs (pretty much everyone works for HP or various boring hardware companies). The city is nice enough that most people don't want to move, so "do something that actually matters without having to leave" would be very attractive. Also the incredibly number of mountain trails would probaby be good for thinking.

Have you guys already done a voting survey (with whatever system seems good – STAR voting?) sent out to (1) the population of talent you want to take with you for AI research, (2) rationalists who aren't mission critical but are still valuable as interstitial social elements?

If not – at some point that's going to happen, right? This discussion seems most useful if it exists to inform a large number of people who might move what the options are, so that their preferences can be assessed numerically.

• Rocky Mountain: Boulder, CO; Fort Collins, CO; Bozeman, MT; Missoula, MT

MIRI - I work in Boulder, went to school in Boulder, it would be cool to have you in Boulder and part of me still really loves Boulder... BUT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PLEASE DON'T RELOCATE TO BOULDER.

It's just not the environment it was in 90s where it was more creative and open, it's ideologically hidebound and I find it stifling.  YMMV, but I wouldn't count on it.

Fort Collins wouldn't be awful. I've thought of moving there before and it's better than people give it credit for, but it's adjacent to some places that would be.... lower in openness than you would like. 

If you're looking for a hidden up-and-coming gem in Colorado, I suggest Durango. 

I’d love to help you find property in New Hampshire, it’s awesome here. When you say “good indoor spaces for work and hangouts”, for how many people, and can you be more specific about your desires for the space?

Ticks: I've found more ticks on me in the bay area than I did when I lived in Connecticut and Rhode Island. I don't think that's fully explained by behavioral changes.

I have a good deal of control over my exposure to ticks. I haven't put much effort into avoiding them. Well over 90% of the times I've found ticks on me were after going off-trail. Brushing against tall grass seems especially high risk. Wide trails seem to have very low risk. The clearest exception I've seen to this pattern may have involved transmission via a dog.

I started getting more tick bites after I stopped using sunscreen. That's definitely not due to getting more ticks on me. I think the sunscreen caused them to wander around much longer before deciding where to bite, giving me more time to find them when they're still crawling.

I've never found a tick more than 24 hours after my suspected exposure. I don't think I'm unusually diligent about checking for them.

The big caveat here is that the ticks that transmit Lyme are smaller than the ones I'm used to finding on me. I had a recent test that detected small amounts of a Lyme virus in my blood. I haven't seen any corresponding symptoms, so I don't have any guess as to where I lived when I got infected. I presume I never detected the tick that caused it.

Other insects: those mosquito maps seem misleading. There's a lot of local variation. Most parts of California seem pretty mosquito-free. The few parts that I've found bad were in mountains where the snow recently melted. The median location in New England has significantly more mosquitoes, and also a wider variety of other distracting insects, than the median location in California. My impression is that Maine is the worst state overall for insect distractions of the states that I have enough experience with to evaluate (mainly New England and the area from Colorado west), yet those maps suggest it's good.

I consider grass pollen to be a bigger negative than insects. Grass pollen bothers me much more in New England than it does anywhere in the west.

My overall preferences (for reasons mostly involving weather, outdoor recreational options, and political climate): Of the top 5 places that you mention, Reno is my top choice, Bellingham is 2nd, New Hampshire is 3rd. Colorado also seems worth considering.

There's a significant chance I'll want to stay in the bay area, probably moving to somewhere a bit less urban than Berkeley.

(I wrote a post laying out some notes about Austin, but wasn't logged in. When I logged in the post was lost. So, this is a note for the site developers that this is a pretty bad failure case.)

Has there been an update on this yet? At least for me, it's starting to be decision o'clock about where to live next (and I'm probably not the only one). If MIRI's new location is going to be a factor in that decision, then we need to know about it quickly - ideally this week.

Have you thought about Frederick, MD? I am really just suggesting that out of self interest since it's sort of close to me, but here is my pitch:

-One hour train ride/drive to dc--lots of people work in dc and take the train in

-Super charming main street with lots of coffee shops/art galleries/public art walk/gardens/small museums/unique gyms

-Attractive river/canal/creek/not-sure-what-it-is running through town

-Beautiful and surrounded by nature--tons of hiking trails all around without getting in car. An easy drive to sugarloaf mountain, harpers ferry/the Appalachian trail etc.

-Low cost housing stock

-Relatively relaxed about zoning (more true to the county than the city, but both are pretty relaxed relative to most places)

-Very LGBTQ friendly--see for example the city-sponsored pride festival

-Politically diverse/moderate and tolerant

-Easy to connect with DC/Montgomery County rationalists and also extend reach to more rural areas

Edited to add: Also lots of job opportunities if an hour commute on the train is too much for you--plenty of biotech firms up and down the adjacent highway that hire people with all sorts of skill sets (marketed as the "I-270 technology corridor") as well as some option in Frederick proper.

ETA2: Also, Maryland in general has a pretty consistent record of electing relatively sensible, moderate governors. Although we are a liberal state, we have a super popular pro-business republican governor.

nitpick: the chart describing mosquito prevalence indicates that minnesota is mosquito-free, which i can tell you is blatantly untrue (although it probably is true that bellingham, WA has fairly few mosquitos). this may be because those 2 mosquito species are not one of minnesota's problem species, but still, skepticism is warranted. minnesota summers have a shitton of mosquitos.

i would give a nomination for minneapolis, minnesota, although if a major criterion is "local culture and politics", i'm not sure how much to weight e.g. george floyd riots. i can speak a lot to the perks of growing up there, but less about the current environment since i moved away 6 years ago.

another city to consider: portland maine. i was very impressed by the walkability and vibe when i visited, although it may be too cold in the winter, if that is a major concern.

Since my last comment here did not seem to work I put it in a google document. This is a way to deep dive on where are the best places in the USA to raise a family with more than two kids: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tq9rY1TCs49XHckWtzOowYz_xHXFnRpOZq8r0lE5JSQ/edit#heading=h.cywpygwwkhbl

I'm very curious what kind of "campus" type properties you're thinking of!

A YC-backed nonprofit, https://www.degreesoffreedom.org/, bought a fully functional campus in Vermont last year (Marlboro College). https://vtdigger.org/2020/07/23/sale-of-marlboro-college-campus-finalized/ -- for $1.75M, which seems like a steal to me (although later revelations suggest this might not have been the full price paid). Is this the kind of thing you were imagining?

(interesting side note: One of the founders, Seth Andrews, appears to have just last month been arrested for financial crimes. https://vtdigger.org/2021/04/27/feds-accuse-seth-andrew-whose-nonprofit-purchased-marlboro-college-campus-of-stealing-over-200000/ and more financial details here https://vermontbiz.com/news/2021/may/05/marlboro-whats-next)

I think that Scotland would be a not bad choice (Although I am obviously somewhat biased about that)

Speaks the language, plenty of nice scenery. Reasonably sensible political situation. (I would say overall better than america) Cool weather. Good public healthcare. Some nice uni towns with a fair bit of stem community. Downsides would include being further from america. (I don't know where all your colleges are located, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot were in america, and a fair few were in Europe.)

I would recommend looking somewhere on the outskirts of Dundee, St Andrews, Edinburgh or Glasgow.

I imagine that the Peekskill, New York location might be similar in setting, environment, and overall relationship to NYC as Princeton, NJ. So it might be worth talking to people who've spent time at one of the universities or institutes in Princeton in order to understand the relative merits of such a setting and how they felt about the balance there between rural and urban. 

(My disclosure is that I have spent time in such a setting and found it overly isolating, to the point of struggling to get any useful work completed there, and ended up moving to live in NYC. However, from the content of this post, perhaps the MIRI staff have pretty different preferences with regard to ideal living and research environments as compared to me.)

You mention having a second office in "the city proper": Would that be referring to Bellingham and Peekskill or Seattle and NYC? Alternatively would working from home some days of the week be viable for many employees?

I ask this because to me these would make the difference for the viability of living mainly in Seattle/NYC and spending 3 days a week at the campus, as opposed to the reverse case of living mainly near the campus and going into the city on weekends.

This isn't a huge difference from the perspective of doing things on weekends, but it makes a difference for having a significant other who lives in the city and going to meetups. It means if you want to live with someone who has to commute from the city you get to spend 5/7 evenings a week with them instead of 3/7, which to me seems like a pretty big difference, and I suspect would seem like a big difference to prospective partners as well. I also find weekly meetups like OBNYC to be a great foundation for a social life, and taking the train both ways for them would be a bit much. So given OBNYC Meetups are on Tuesdays, any MIRI employees living in NYC that spent Wed/Thurs/Fri on campus would be free to attend them.

Personally, dating and socializing concerns mean that I'd find the "live in NYC, spend 3 days a week on a campus in nature" option rather appealing, but the "live on campus, spend weekends at partner's place or hotel in NYC" much less appealing.

Some more fuel for Austin:

While the comparison is not made directly in this article, I think there is somewhat of a tick vs. mosquito trade-off being made specifically between the NY/Peekskill and Austin sites, given that NY is just barely out of the mosquito area on that map, and Austin is right in it.

But I mention this to say, as a native Southern Louisianan, I'd be far more wary of getting Lyme disease than being bothered by mosquitoes. Mosquitoes, while sometimes annoyingly resilient to repellents and things, are simultaneously rather fickle ~ a slight breeze or minor change in temperature is enough to dispel them. 

That includes the fact that they're only seasonal, and when they are around, changes within a single day offset them.

And if MIRI staff want to spend significant time outside, the Austin area offers ample space in literally every direction outside of Austin proper.

And yes it gets hot, but Austin's location in Central Texas puts it just outside of that very dense, humid climate of the Southeast. Even the Northeast, including NY, is pretty humid and dense.

And the latter is not always bad, but Austin has that Western, desert, dryer air, which will be familiar to Californians, and which many people find not as taxing.

(Insert "It's not the heat, it's the humidity that gets ya" cliche here ~ but it's true!)

It's a physically beautiful area, too.

I understand you haven't necessarily found a specific location around Austin yet, but it's there somewhere.

Sounds like the Washington State option isn't that appealing, even though you have Bellingham on the list.

Scott Alexander recently pointed out that some of the same problems apply in the Cascadia region as exist in CA, even though it's a bit cheaper. And it's just a bit colder, too.

And all the other locations are seemingly more minor options.

The South, Texas, and Austin are all growing overall, for lots of reasons, and being around Austin puts one near all that growth and dynamism of the Sun Belt, but still not enveloped in either conservative Deep South culture, nor in the path of potential hurricanes, which the rest of the Southeast, including nearby parts of Southeast Texas, are at risk of. Austin is just far enough for the strongest of hurricanes to have died out rather well by reaching that point.

Plus, I mean Austin is one of the growing major tech hubs, Houston and Dallas are working on a high-speed rail between them, and that could eventually grow to include Austin and San Antonio. 

And Houston and Dallas each have major airports, both of which are some of the most well-connected and international in the world.

And Austin is likely to get more flights as more demand develops. Word is Delta may make it a hub, but I'm not sure about that.

And being in Central Texas, it's very conveniently located to travel to anywhere else in the US, as opposed to being all the way on one or another coast or in a far quadrant.

And no state income tax, just like Washington.

Lastly, being on the cusp of the West, if anything goes awry, sociopolitically or otherwise, the capacity to shift toward West Texas or even further, and holdout elsewhere, seems much safer, spatially and logistically, than being in a relatively crowded place like the Northeast. Although this is perhaps more subjective than my other points.

And you all don't have to be in Austin proper and deal with high rent and traffic. You can just go there when you want or need.

I'd chalk up this comment to another vote for the Austin area.

If you are considering New Hampshire, you should also look at Western Massachusetts.  Both offer the opportunity to drive to Boston, but without high city land prices.  Western Mass also has many colleges including University of Mass at Amherst.  Lyme disease, however, is a problem.

Although we’ve been focusing heavily on the US in our search, we’re also still interested in country suggestions

One thing I as a non-US citizen am interested in is whether alternate countries are easier to immigrate into. Some light research just now seems to show that Canada has a more liberal immigration policy. I tried finding a list of countries by ease of immigration, but couldn't immediately find anything like that.

I'll see whether I can make a more concrete alternative suggestion, but I just wanted to mention the question of immigration in case you've already thought about it.

Personally, I have been thinking about moving to the bay area for a while (and I visited once), but things like the housing market (and the hassle of immigration) kept me from following through. The two cities you presented here sound absolutely lovely though, so I would quite like to join you there (or in a similar place).

I think Reno is the one I would be most likely to move to. It's fairly close to the SF Bay Area, which is where my family lives, and thus a major plus for me (and major minus for anywhere on the east coast). It's also one of the sunniest places, which would significantly enhance my enjoyment of being outside (I know the luminators are pretty good for SAD indoors, but going outside still doesn't give me the same boost/refreshment if it's cloudy/dreary). I'd prefer it over Austin because I'm wary of living in a red state. Unfortunately, Reno has an ugly aesthetic IMO, but it also has a very nostalgic feeling for me since I grew up in Utah, which is similar minus the neon. Another nice thing is that it's close to lake Tahoe.

I am expecting to "settle down" in either the Bay Area or Seattle. So I like the Bellingham option.

I moved to Seattle from the Bay Area, and while I love the weather and relatively sane rent and general environment around here, I think 14% of the US population having a mild form of SAD should be one of the dominating factors in decisionmaking. I have mild SAD, which I find acceptable because I'm not standing in any civilizational bottlenecks, but I would move if I worked at an EA organization and considered my work very important.

If you guys consider SAD to be a solved problem via more dakka [LW · GW], then I retract this and mostly recommend the area.

Personal reaction: I'd like to live in the same place as MIRI, and I'd like to live not very far from a city. So my favourite options out of those are Austin and Reno. I hear that colder places mysteriously have better weather and less crime, so maybe Reno is better, but Austin seems better on a more inside view.

I'm probably biased, but I do think Australia scores well on stability and access to nice nature. New Zealand probably does even better, but Australia has the advantage (disadvantage?) of being the centre of mass for business.

Although we’ve been focusing heavily on the US in our search, we’re also still interested in country suggestions

Any strong reason for preferring US locations? For example, Singapore has many advantages like having a broadly competent government/bureaucracy, local politics different enough from typical AngloAmerican issues that staff will be disinclined to wade in, lots of smart and mathematically competent people from local universities, English native language, a thriving expat community, tropical weather, etc. 

(Btw the text editor is very annoying for quotes).

Bellingham was also one of my top finalists for a personal move after I spent dozens of hours poring over statistics and maps.   I used a tool on city-data.com that works like a stock screener for cities.

http://www.city-data.com/advanced/search.php#body?fips=0&csize=a&sc=10&sd=1&states=ALL&near=&nam_crit1=5195&b5195=20000&e5195=MAX&i5195=1&nam_crit2=1033&b1033=20000&e1033=MAX&i1033=1&nam_crit3=5900&b5900=MIN&e5900=5&i5900=1&nam_crit4=4048&b4048=MIN&e4048=45&i4048=1&nam_crit5=983&b983=1&e983=MAX&i983=1&nam_crit6=6532&b6532=1&e6532=MAX&i6532=1&nam_crit7=4036&b4036=MIN&e4036=502000&i4036=1&nam_crit8=507&b507=MIN&e507=85&i507=1&nam_crit9=5269&b5269=80&e5269=MAX&i5269=1&nam_crit10=6612&b6612=5&e6612=MAX&i6612=1&ps=20&p=0

I have a property I would like to suggest, but strangely considering that you are MIRI's communications lead, I can find no email address where I can contact you, Rob. In fact, you apparently have LinkedIn set so that I cannot connect with you there and I cannot send you a message through there, or here. 

Anyway, I suggest that you consider Richmond, VA. There are many good properties that are large and relatively secluded but also offer very easy (~20 min) access to downtown Richmond, which is a growing city of ~250,000 (metro 1,000,000+) and college town (VCU, other nearby universities) although not known as a tech hub. 

There is plenty to do there and it is relatively "purple", i.e. not too oppressive for people with the "wrong" political views since people have to co-exist. Mountains and beach are within easy driving range (~1.5 hrs) and you also have the James River, etc. for outside recreation. 

There are properties with 50+ acres with existing buildings that might be suitable for a campus-type arrangement.

Housing is very affordable compared to the Bay or other large metropolitan areas, although increasing with the influx of people from nearby Washington D.C. Downtown is very walkable and relaxed, and I think LGBT friendly, with all the normal metropolitan amenities. There is a nearby international airport although it's not a major hub. Government is stable with moderate taxes. Climate is a bit oppressive in the Summer (reaching 90 degrees many days in July/August) but otherwise pleasant.

As a midwesterner: Columbus OH, various Chicago suburbs, and various Detroit suburbs should be on your list. Plausibly also Kalamazoo MI and Bloomington-Normal IL.

On the smaller population side, another town similar to Champaign-Urbana IL is Ithaca NY.

I'm curious about the list of places that would be good except that they don't have the right kind of property available.