It seems like an overstatement that the topics of EA are completely disjoint with topics of interest to various established academic disciplines.
I didn’t mean to say this, there’s certainly overlap. My claim is that (at least in AI safety, and I would guess in other EA areas as well) the reasons we do the research we do are different from those of most academics. It’s certainly possible to repackage the research in a format more suited to academia—but it must be repackaged, which leads to
rewrite your paper so that regular academics understand it whereas other EAs who actually care about it don’t
I agree that the things you list have a lot of benefits, but they seem quite hard to me to do. I do still think publishing with peer review is worth it despite the difficulty.
I didn’t mean to say this, there’s certainly overlap. My claim is that (at least in AI safety, and I would guess in other EA areas as well) the reasons we do the research we do are different from those of most academics. It’s certainly possible to repackage the research in a format more suited to academia—but it must be repackaged, which leads to
I agree that the things you list have a lot of benefits, but they seem quite hard to me to do. I do still think publishing with peer review is worth it despite the difficulty.