To elaborate on existing comments, a fourth alternative to FAI theory, Earning To Give, and popularization is strategy research. (That could include research on other risks besides AI.) I find that the fruit in this area is not merely low-hanging but rotting on the ground. I've read in old comment threads that Eliezer and Carl Shulman in particular have done a lot of thinking about strategy but very little of it has been written down, and they are very busy people. Circumstances may well dictate retracing a lot of their steps.

You've said elsewhere that you have a low estimate of your innate mathematical ability, which would preclude FAI research, but presumably strategy research would require lower aptitude. Things like statistics would be invaluable, but strategy research would also involve a lot of comparatively less technical work, like historical and philosophical analysis, experiments and surveys, literature reviews, lots and lots of reading, etc. Also, you've already done a bit of strategizing; if you are fulfilled by thinking about those things and you think your abilities meet the task, then it might be a good alternative.

Some strategy research resources:

• Luke Muehlhauser's How to study superintelligence strategy.

• Luke's AI Risk and Opportunity: A Strategic Analysis sequence.

• Analysis Archives of the MIRI blog.

• The AI Impacts blog, particularly the Possible Empirical Investigations post and links therein.

• The Future of Life Institute's A survey of research questions for robust and beneficial AI.

• Naturally, Bostrom's Superintelligence.