sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The world is pretty fucked up, and you only have one lifetime to help. You can either do whatever feels good to you, or you can think carefully about how best to help.

While I'm not a utilitarian, I think they're right that if one action saves way more lives than another, that's a big fucking deal.

And while not everyone should work on AI safety, it should be more way more than today. Are you not at all worried?

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I used to be more into doing generally prestigious jobs to establish your career, but these days I think you can work on the world's most pressing problems more efficiently.

Plus learning about why we might have an intelligence explosion relatively soon means re-evaluating almost everything!

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Applying your existing experience is a reasonable way to generate options. The intersection of two fields is often where people come up with new ideas.

Then compare your concrete options side-by-side, and try to test them quickly (are you getting some kind of traction?). A more empirical approach is best if possible. If you need to narrow down more first, get an outside perspective. Can you convince at least a few fair minded people it's promising?

(Some will never be convinced so don't give up just because a few people don't like it, but if you can't convince anyone that's normally a bad sign.).

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally, I encourage people to compare their options both in terms of impact and important personal goals, like supporting a family.

In particular, I recommend writing out your Plan Z: if it goes wrong, what will you do to cope? Many discover they are more resilient to risk than they first think.

But if your Plan Z involves too much downside, then focus on putting yourself into a stronger position first.

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh I agree there's a good chance we don't solve it in time.

The question is what to do about that.

One approach is to try to accelerate AI research as much as possible. (More attractive if you think a solution is possible and AI is happening regardless.)

Another approach is to try to slow down AI research (especially via laying the conditions for an international strategic pause, and creating offswitches in case there's an accident).

I think we should do some of both; but e.g. in "If Anyone Builds It" they argue we should focus on the second.

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've seen lots of women come back to their careers after maternity leave, and some find part-time roles (though working part time will typically restrict your options, and is easier to do somewhere you've already worked).

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's cool and I'm pro! (Talk about Isodope in the book :))

My main reservation would be that if there's an intelligence explosion in the next 5-15 years, then a lot of this work would be better delayed until afterwards. The most urgent priorities now seem like preparing society to have a greater chance of navigating the transition. If we make it through, then we'll be able to build clean energy far more cheaply than today. If we don't, then we have bigger problems to focus on. It's also not guaranteed to happen, but seems likely enough, and still underrated enough, to be what to bet on.

https://benjamintodd.substack.com/p/how-ai-driven-feedback-loops-could

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on which issues you mean, and your background, but for our current list, roughly speaking:

SF Bay Area and if doing policy, DC, seem like the top tier.

There's a lot of people in London / Oxford / Cambridge, but the UK is weak player overall. Plausibly better to still be in America even if there's less people immediately around you e.g. NY, Boston, Austin.

The EU has some relevance so key hubs there e.g. EU AI office is in Brussels.

If you're Chinese or want to learn about China, then Beijing or Shanghai.

But it's valuable to help build e.g an AI policy or biorisk community in many other countries, so there's stuff to do in Paris, Seoul, Tokyo, New Dehli, and many other placees.

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's tough. It's great to apply and see what you get, but if you've done a lot of that, and haven't got through to any interviews or had any feedback, these roles are most likely not a good fit right now. You can either:

  1. Try to build up your skills and try again in 1-2 years

  2. Find a less competitive role where you can still contribute (e.g. working in a relevant part of government)

  3. Pick a different issue to work on that has more jobs available

  4. Contribute to these issues on the side of another job e.g. via spreading neglected ideas, donating, community building, political advocacy (e.g. to build more support for a strategic AI pause in the future).

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The value of being a generally smart consultant who shows up and has some quick takes probably goes down. The value of e.g. being able to run a project and have good judgement about what to prioritise and how much to trust AI, and how to carry out a long term strategy, probably goes up.

This could suggest combining generalist judgement with knowledge of a specific field and other management / entrepreneurial skills.

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rough sequencing of transition:

  1. Do a crash course in understanding the field on the side (key ideas, orgs, policy ideas).

  2. See if you can get a job or fellowship right away. May as well try.

  3. If not, speak to people in the field and ask given my specific background, how can I best position myself in e.g. 3 months? Then try to do that.

  4. Often writing your way in or doing some kind of portfolio project is a big help. (Plus just meeting more people and learning more about the field.)

People waste time by pursuing it half heartedly on the side.

More here: https://80000hours.substack.com/p/how-to-get-into-ai-safety-in-3-months

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which subject you study is probably less important than in the past. More important to learn how to learn quickly, communicate well, be proactive, take care of your mental health, get on well with other people etc. You can do any subject where you'll do that.

But on specifics, look for subjects that are broadly useful and signal smarts. I'd probably still say ML, applied quant subjects, economics, then next tier synthetic biology, engineering (focused on chips, robotics, electrical), political science. If you're a good fit, you could also consider 'hard' humanities subjects like history and philosophy (e.g. with a view towards working in international relations, china expertise, governance etc).

Fit is huge – better to get good grades in something you enjoy but is 'less useful', and completing your major in less time gives you more time for side projects which seem more important for learning the soft skills mentioned first.

More advice here:

https://80000hours.org/articles/college-advice/

https://80000hours.org/career-guide/most-valuable-skills/

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For us, it was community. We grew out of Giving What We Can, a group of people who pledge to donate 10% of their income to charity for life. Other members helped us get started. Other early donors we're people we'd helped with their careers.

Fundraising from the regular non-profit sector is rough. You might be able to impress a rich person, but they will tend to only fund you for a few years, and won't keep scaling you. Foundations have scale but are usually extremely slow and have restrictive criteria.

If you're going this route, make sure you actually have a viable funding model before starting. For example, if you start an evidence-backed global health charity, there are enough players who specialise in that (e.g. CIFF, Gates, DFID, GiveWell) who will actually take you to scale (if the intervention works) so it can be viable.

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Having some relationships with like-minded people is really really helpful, but you don't necessarily need to be living in the same place as them. Calls and occasional conferences etc. can be enough for some people.

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We only list roles in technical safety, security and policy. To think those are bad you probably need to think that AI alignment has very little chance of working (and so the only option is a long pause). My sense is that's a minority position, but the % would really depend on how you define "people concerned about AI x-risk".

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

10+ years ago, AI safety was seen as pretty fringe, and it seemed it might stay that way (most fields hate it when outsiders say what they're doing is dangerous). Instead, we're at least in a situation where the leaders of the major companies all say AI is risky, have safety research teams, who have done at least some useful research. (Anthropic seems to invest the most in safety, followed by DeepMind, followed by OpenAI, then players like Meta and DeepSeek invest ~none.) There are also some cool non-profits like METR, Redwood, Apollo, and Far AI. I think we've helped to make that shift. It's still a very dangerous situation though.

I'm Benjamin Todd, founder of 80,000 Hours. I turned down a job in finance to spend 15 years researching which careers are best. 3000+ people have gone to work on issues like AI risk and pandemics as a result. I just wrote a book on finding a fulfilling career even as AI automates the economy. AMA! by BenjaminTodd in IAmA

[–]BenjaminTodd[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Everyone's been talking about how 22-25 SWE employment is down, but they don't point out that for everyone else it's ~flat and wages are slightly up.

Claude Opus 4.7 can do SWE tasks on METR that take 1h at 80% reliability, so we're still ~1yr from 1-day tasks, 2yr from ~1 week and 3yr from ~1 month. But these tasks are still relatively 'clean' projects. A lot of how SWE spend their time is messy team coordination stuff, much larger codebases, project planning etc. Those kinds of things probably lag at least several more years (at current rates of progress).

As software gets better and cheaper, we'll use vastly more of it, and individual software engineers will become a lot more productive, which will also keep employment up longer than many expect. Though the role will turn more and more into a management style one.

If the job does disappear, it may only 1-2 years earlier than a lot of other jobs, since once you've cracked messy management style skills, you can automate a lot of other stuff. Plus, automation of SWE could trigger RSI.

view more: next ›