I’m a college freshman deciding between double majoring in CS and dentistry (8 years total) or majoring only in CS (4 years). Although dentistry isn’t useful for reducing AI risks and isn’t quite interesting to me, the main appeal is adding another earning-to-give route as a dentist. However, I’m not askingwhether I should pursue dentistry. I’d like to isolate one key sub-question here: If the fat-tailed distribution of impact holds true(as picture below), an average direct worker’s contribution may be negligible compared to the talented (though I’m uncertain). Therefore, if my ability in AI risks direct work turns out average compared to other EA people in future, how would you compare an average direct AI risks worker’s contribution to a dentist who donates an extra $80,000 per year? Instead of asking which is better, I’d ask: How do you personally evaluate this trade-off?
I’ve been thinking for like 300 hours and I feel like hitting diminishing returns from isolated thinking.
Therefore, please don’t aim for a correct or rigorous answer. Replies of 1-minute gut intuitions as short as “My main crux is X” or “I think you may be neglecting Y” would already be extremely helpful. Thank you very much.
I think the highest priority question is probably something about how quickly you expect AI to go. I’m mostly not planning anything 8 years out, because I think the world is likely to be massively different.
The next highest priority question is something about how you expect AI to impact your various potential career options. For example, it seems plausible to me that almost all dental care could be moderately skilled people wearing high resolution cameras and receiving real-time advice from AIs with current tech, let alone near-future tech, and 8 years is a long time for society to catch up. On the other hand, CS is becoming automated even more rapidly!
So this isn’t really the question you’re asking, but I’d prioritize learning how to get the most out of frontier AI systems: getting good at specifying what you want and recognizing whether you’ve received that. A lot of this is traditionally management. I’d try to do as much of this while in college as possible, but not stay any longer than necessary; 4y is already a very long time.
Thanks a lot for your reply. I’m really grateful for it.
I think you’re right that double majoring in dentistry for an extra 4 years is a risk. For example, if a human-level AGI robot comes in 10 years, dentists might be replaced. However, not studying dentistry could also be a risk if human-level AGI comes slowly — for instance, if AGI isn’t developed in the next 30 years. In that case, dentists probably won’t be replaced for 30 years. But the average CS engineer’s salary may decrease significantly in just 5 years.
You’re right that management is important, but if I’m average at management and I can’t be expert at any useful things, dentistry might be the only path where I can have significant impact (by earning to give).
That’s the reason I’m wondering whether the contribution of an average direct worker may be significantly lower than that of dentists donating $80,000 a year. (However, I’m really uncertain about this. I’d be grateful if you’d like to share your thoughts on it.)
However, not studying dentistry could also be a risk if human-level AGI comes slowly — for instance, if AGI isn’t developed in the next 30 years. In that case, dentists probably won’t be replaced for 30 years.
I think this is unlikely, since almost all work that is done by dentists today could be automated with current levels of AI. In theory this could mean more employment for dentists, since perhaps if dentistry were cheaper people would want a lot more of it, but while I do think this is how things work in many fields I think that’s unlikely for dentists.
I think it’s overall very hard to predict where things would go, so if I were a college freshman I would try to (a) maximize my options by staying flexible and learning a lot of different things and (b) stay on top of the tech as it matures so I’m in a position to notice when things newly become possible and take advantage of that (younger people tend to be much more adaptable).
Hello Jeff: (I’m a big fan of your writings).
I’m a college freshman deciding between double majoring in CS and dentistry (8 years total) or majoring only in CS (4 years). Although dentistry isn’t useful for reducing AI risks and isn’t quite interesting to me, the main appeal is adding another earning-to-give route as a dentist.
However, I’m not asking whether I should pursue dentistry. I’d like to isolate one key sub-question here:
If the fat-tailed distribution of impact holds true(as picture below), an average direct worker’s contribution may be negligible compared to the talented (though I’m uncertain). Therefore, if my ability in AI risks direct work turns out average compared to other EA people in future, how would you compare an average direct AI risks worker’s contribution to a dentist who donates an extra $80,000 per year?
Instead of asking which is better, I’d ask: How do you personally evaluate this trade-off?
I’ve been thinking for like 300 hours and I feel like hitting diminishing returns from isolated thinking.
Therefore, please don’t aim for a correct or rigorous answer. Replies of 1-minute gut intuitions as short as “My main crux is X” or “I think you may be neglecting Y” would already be extremely helpful. Thank you very much.
I think the highest priority question is probably something about how quickly you expect AI to go. I’m mostly not planning anything 8 years out, because I think the world is likely to be massively different.
The next highest priority question is something about how you expect AI to impact your various potential career options. For example, it seems plausible to me that almost all dental care could be moderately skilled people wearing high resolution cameras and receiving real-time advice from AIs with current tech, let alone near-future tech, and 8 years is a long time for society to catch up. On the other hand, CS is becoming automated even more rapidly!
So this isn’t really the question you’re asking, but I’d prioritize learning how to get the most out of frontier AI systems: getting good at specifying what you want and recognizing whether you’ve received that. A lot of this is traditionally management. I’d try to do as much of this while in college as possible, but not stay any longer than necessary; 4y is already a very long time.
Hello Jeff,
Thanks a lot for your reply. I’m really grateful for it.
I think you’re right that double majoring in dentistry for an extra 4 years is a risk. For example, if a human-level AGI robot comes in 10 years, dentists might be replaced. However, not studying dentistry could also be a risk if human-level AGI comes slowly — for instance, if AGI isn’t developed in the next 30 years. In that case, dentists probably won’t be replaced for 30 years. But the average CS engineer’s salary may decrease significantly in just 5 years.
You’re right that management is important, but if I’m average at management and I can’t be expert at any useful things, dentistry might be the only path where I can have significant impact (by earning to give).
That’s the reason I’m wondering whether the contribution of an average direct worker may be significantly lower than that of dentists donating $80,000 a year. (However, I’m really uncertain about this. I’d be grateful if you’d like to share your thoughts on it.)
I think this is unlikely, since almost all work that is done by dentists today could be automated with current levels of AI. In theory this could mean more employment for dentists, since perhaps if dentistry were cheaper people would want a lot more of it, but while I do think this is how things work in many fields I think that’s unlikely for dentists.
I think it’s overall very hard to predict where things would go, so if I were a college freshman I would try to (a) maximize my options by staying flexible and learning a lot of different things and (b) stay on top of the tech as it matures so I’m in a position to notice when things newly become possible and take advantage of that (younger people tend to be much more adaptable).