Thanks for the quick response Kevin. Haha, so in my original question I was going to say 'with the exclusion of the work of Chad Jones', i.e. the intersection of growth theory and EA/longtermism, which seem quite clear to me.
I would be interested in hearing about the other presenters: (Ben) Jones, Azoulay, Williams, Reenen, etc.
What are the intersections between this and EA focused research? Would love to see some examples if you (or anyone else) has any.
Yes. I think we can essentially nerd-snipe academics. Maybe get a bunch of social scientists and have a mini-conference about what other EA researchers are doing: say AI governance, forecasting, etc.
It gives them a network, an idea of what others are doing, and accelerated intro into EA.
Does seem like the ROI could be large.
I think it's a cool idea.
One thing that comes to mind that I have noticed is many academics aren't aware of EA but I think they would be on board. Many of these academics have time (often tenured), resources (to help EA students), and networks. I wonder if there's a way of targeting/appealing to this demographic.
I'm pretty certain they'll get back to you soon. If not, send a follow-up email.
Was recently just complaining about this - great post.
I like the post but I'm not entirely convinced. Even if these are optional classes to pad your degree out, you'd have to think taking history classes adds more value than all other potential options. I don't entirely believe that's the case even if I agree with many of your points in the post.
Trying my luck here but would I also be able to get funds for academic projects (my research interests are in Metascience/Innovation/Growth)?
That's the one! OP, I think some version of this is definitely worth implementing/revival. I often share various EA articles on my personal twitter feed, and I know people (for example Stefan Schubert) who share EA articles, which captures an audience (that find the content interesting/engaging) that do not always read the EAF regularly.
I thought something like this already existed but I could be mistaken.