Hi everyone,
Many people in EA aren’t able to get as much career advice as they’d like, while at the same time, hundreds of EAs are happy to provide informal advice and mentoring within their career area.
Much of what we do in our one-on-one advice at 80,000 Hours is try to connect these two groups, but we’re not able to cover a significant number of people. At the same time, spaces like the EA careers discussion FB group don’t seem to have taken off as a place where people get concrete advice.
As an experiment, I thought we could try having an open career questions thread on the Forum.
By posting a reply here, anyone can post a question about their career, without having to make a top level post, and anyone on the forum can write an answer.
If it works well, we could do it each month or so.
To get things going, some of the 80,000 Hours team will be available from Monday onwards to write quick answers to topics they have views on (in an individual capacity rather than representing our official view), though our hope is that others will get involved.
For those with questions, I could imagine those ranging from high-level to practical:
- I’m trying to choose whether to focus on global health or climate change, how should I decide?
- I can either accept this job offer or go to graduate school, which seems best?
- Which skills should I focus on learning in my spare time?
- Where can I learn more about how to interview for jobs in policy?
I’m especially keen to see questions from people who haven’t posted much before.
The answers to your questions will probably be more useful if you can share a bit of background, though feel free to skip if it'll prevent you from asking at all! You can also skip if you're asking a very general question.
Here’s a short template to provide background – feel free to pick whichever parts seem most useful as context:
- Which 2-5 problem areas do you intend to focus on?
- What ideas for longer-term roles do you have?
- What do you see as your strengths & most valuable career capital?
- Some key facts on your experience / qualifications / achievements (or a link to your LinkedIn profile if you’re comfortable linking your name to the question).
- Any important personal constraints to keep in mind (e.g. tied to a certain location)
- What 2-5 next career moves are you considering? (i.e. specific jobs or educational opportunities you might take)
If you want to do a longer version, you could use our worksheet.
Just please bear in mind this will all be public on the internet for the long term. Don’t post things you wouldn’t want future employers to see, unless using an anonymous account. Even being frank about the pros and cons of different jobs can easily look bad.
As a reminder, we have more resources to help you write out and clarify your plan here.
For those responding to questions, bear in mind this thread might attract people who are newer to the forum, and careers can be a personal subject, so try to keep it friendly.
I’m looking forward to your questions and seeing how the thread unfolds!
Update 21 Dec: Thank you everyone for the questions and responses! The 80k team won't be able to post much more until Jan, but we'll try to respond after that.
(Background: Have worked in trading since late 2013, with one ~18 month gap. Have also spoken to >5 people facing a decision similar to this one over the years. This is a set of points I often end up making. I'm moderately confident about each statement below but wouldn't be surprised if one of them is wrong.)
I think both of these paths are very 'spiky', in the sense that I think the top 10% has many times more impact (either via donations or direct work) than the median. From a pure altruistic perspective, I think you mostly want to maximise the chance of spiking.
One of the best ways to maximise this is to be able to switch after you realise you aren't in that category; in trading I think you're likely to have a good sense of your appoximate path within 2-4 years, so in the likely even that you are not hitting the high end at that point you have an opportunity to switch, if your alternate allows you to switch (often but certainly not always the case). Similarly, I'd try to work out what flexibility you have on the AI PhD path; if you do in fact find the day-to-day frustrating and decide to quit in order to avoid burnout, what are your options? If you can switch either way, that's great and this largely ceases to be an important consideration.
On a related note, and echoing some others, 2-4 years undoubtedly sounds like a long time now but it's actually a pretty small fraction of your career. Don't feel like a 'bad' choice now will forever condemn you to an inferior path! Any choice that does actually lock you in this way is probably a bad choice for that reason alone, but again usually this feels like it is the case more than it is actually the case.
Some people underestimate quant trading earnings at top-tier firms, because the firms are extremely cagey about them. FWIW, I think >$1m annual earnings within 5-10 years is more like the 40th-80th percentile case depending on firm, while the 'spike' case pushes into >$5m within their first decade. That's for trading. Software engineer earnings at these firms I have a weaker sense of; they can either essentially match the traders or fall significantly behind (I don't currently know of a case where it runs ahead); this depends heavily on the specific firm.
Predicting what you're more likely to spike in advance is hard, and is going to be a question of personal fit, so difficult for us to answer, I just think that's the right question. That said, there are some things in your post that make me think AI is more likely to be your life's work:
Sometimes people feel things like the above and assume everyone else feels the same way. As someone who has heard both pro-E2G and pro-AI versions of all of these points, the one thing I'm confident of is that this is not the case. As a community, there are worse ways we could coordinate this than having all the people who are more excited on a gut level about working at quant firms do that, and all the people who are more excited about working on AI do that. I do think there are more of the latter than the former, but that's ok; one person E2G-ing at that level (especially if they spike) can fund many other people doing direct work.
The above is all written from a 'For the Greater Good' perspective. It sounds like a lot of what is pulling you towards quant work is that it's the safe, already-available, almost-certainly-going-to-work-out-well-for-you-personally option. This is a reasonable thing to pay attention to! Just how much attention depends on things like your general level of financial security, do you have or expect to have dependents or other major family committments, how wide/deep is your career path if a particular opportunity goes away, what kinds of backup (e.g. parents you could move in with) do you have, etc. Try not to assume things will work out ok, but equally try not to assume one bad call will end it all if you have layers of protection. This is incredibly variable by individual, and most EA advice is calibrated for young people who are pretty secure, don't have large external obligations, and have solid backup. This in turn strongly points to taking a higher-than-usual level of risk in your altruistically-motivated endeavours. If that's you, then great. If not, it might be worth some reflection about to what extent you can afford to, e.g. aim for the PhD and fail.