I have been asking which industry to stand in for the next few years. The honest answer, for me, is probably not artificial intelligence.

Not because it has no future, but because its bottleneck is leaving. The returns at the algorithm layer are flattening fast — what used to be a research advantage is now a library, then a default, then nothing. Meanwhile the things that actually stop everyone are energy, materials, and the physical organization of matter. When the bottleneck moves from software to physics, the leverage available to an individual inside a pure software industry shrinks: you can optimize someone else's model, you cannot move the world's cost structure.

What I actually care about is energy, matter, and the place where human spirit lives. What those three share is that none of them is an information problem. If you cannot change them, you genuinely cannot — and that is exactly why changing them is structural rather than fashionable.

Which means industry choice comes before effort. I have spent long stretches inside environments that did not fit me, and no amount of effort inside them turned into happiness; it only turned into depletion. What I actually learned is unglamorous and useful: environment decides which problems surround me every day, and the problems I live inside decide what I become.

So the question is not "which sector is hot." It is: what kind of experience do I want to have, and who do I want to be near? That question has a measurable answer — it shows up as the set of problems you are forced to think about on an ordinary Tuesday.