Warning: A somewhat depressing context.

I live in Taiwan, where there are very few people involved in EA. My career goal is to reduce AI risks (especially suffering risks), and I am currently deciding between two options: double majoring in CS and dentistry (takes 8 years), or majoring only in CS (4 years).

Although most EAs I have talked with suggest majoring solely in CS, I worry that in a probable scenario I might not make any significant impact if I don't study dentistry. I would like to discuss this with more people in EA, but about 90% of the time I do not receive replies to my emails.

What if the AGI timeline is slow and AGI arrives 40 years later? In that case, AI might reduce the average salary of CS majors . In my (uncertain) estimation, CS graduates might earn only about half the lifetime income of dentists in pre-AGI era.

If I turn out to be mediocre rather than a top-10% talent, I may be doomed. It seems difficult to receive EA funding without exceptional talent, and according to the fat-tailed distribution described by 80,000 Hours (see the picture below), an average talented person working in AI safety outside EA organizations may not make a significant impact. It also seems possible that only the top 10% in CS will earn salaries comparable to those today and can do earn to give.

Therefore, if I am an average person, I might be unable to both contribute directly and earn to give (unless I become a dentist). Perhaps I should double major in dentistry as a backup plan for earning to give. But if I study for 8 years, by the time I graduate, AGI might already have arrived and I might still fail to make an impact. It feels like I may be doomed whichever path I choose.

I rarely feel that other EAs share these worries, and I wonder why. But it seems I may never know, because very few EAs seems to have time to discuss this with me.

Finally, I'm happy to hear any critique about my thoughts.