The people running such charities have surely already thought of the idea that education/outreach is currently the best way to reduce risk. For example, SIAI is apparently already spending almost all of its money and volunteer time on education and outreach (such as LW, Eliezer’s rationality book, the visiting fellows program, the Singularity Summit).
If you believe that education has a significant effect on existential risk, then charities not explicitly concerned with existential risk may nevertheless be more effectively mitigating it as a byproduct than, say, the SIAI. In particular, you shouldn’t dismiss non risk-reducing charities out of hand because of a supposed difference of scale.
At face value, you should still expect someone with a reasonable ultimate goal to have a more effective focus. But this effect may be counteracted if there is a large difference in competence, or other mitigating factors such as social influence.
If you believe that education has a significant effect on existential risk, then charities not explicitly concerned with existential risk may nevertheless be more effectively mitigating it as a byproduct than, say, the SIAI. In particular, you shouldn’t dismiss non risk-reducing charities out of hand because of a supposed difference of scale.
At face value, you should still expect someone with a reasonable ultimate goal to have a more effective focus. But this effect may be counteracted if there is a large difference in competence, or other mitigating factors such as social influence.