Maybe you're right. Apparently Pareto originally used his distribution to describe wealth allocation & intuitively it seems fair to assume that 20% of the developers account for ~80% of the earnings. But are you sure?
Btw, if developer talent is normally distributed (talent, it seems, usually is), shouldn't developer earnings also be? I'm not a statistician but it's an interesting question..
The impression I learned in my statistical mechanics course 20 years ago is Gaussian distribution works well in the case similar to Random Walk. If the system has restrictions on microscopic behavior, then Gaussian distribution will not apply. I think the benefit of talent may not be in normal distribution. The distribution of probability depends on the case and conditions that we pay attention to.
For example, a talented chef can only serve similar amount dishes in a night as less talented chefs. But the dishes they made taste much better than those and charge more.
At the same time, a talented plumber or a talented doctors can not serve more customers or patients than a less talented plumber or doctors.
It seems when the benefit of the talent scales, the distribution of their influence is Pareto distribution. So it seems developers, musician, artists, physicists fall into this category.
Btw, if developer talent is normally distributed (talent, it seems, usually is), shouldn't developer earnings also be? I'm not a statistician but it's an interesting question..