My Big Bet
AI does not become useful just because people can access it. They need the education, creativity, and judgment to connect it to real work and life.
The best AI workflow at your company is sitting in one person's head. They are not going to share it.
I watched why for four years inside a Fortune 100 company.
I was 22 when I walked in, 26 when I walked out. In between, the company rolled out AI to its engineers. I grew up inside that rollout. So did the AI.
The rollout did not automatically make the company better. It broke things, increased costs, and did not automatically increase production. It also created social pressure between people who used the tools and people who did not.
Everyone got the same tool: a blank chatbot and no instructions.
The people above me had not been taught how to use it any more than I had. You cannot advise on a tool nobody has shown you how to apply. That is not a knock on anyone. Nobody trains the trainers.
The people who were naturally creative with it pulled ahead. Then they went quiet. I watched people hide the workflows they built, not out of malice. If a workflow makes you much faster and you share it, you just gave away your raise.
So the best workflows in the building lived in individual heads, never in the job. A divide opened up between "the AI people" and everyone else, and the second group never got a teacher. They just got labeled.
There was more output. I never found more finished work. When I asked what had actually gotten faster, nobody could show me.
Confusion like that does not disappear. It becomes more meetings, more management, and more rework.
That is harder than some people realize. Creating a useful use case in your head requires technical understanding, context, communication, creativity, and judgment. Not everyone has had the chance to build that combination.
I have also built an AI-assisted system for a local Miami business that increased customer flow by 200% while maintaining operations without adding work for the owners.
The tools were never the problem. The problem was that the workflow belonged to a person instead of the role.
The difference was understanding the work well enough to make the tool fit.
That means organizations of every size, independent people, educators, and creators. There should be no boundary around who gets to understand these tools or imagine what they could make possible.
There are smart people in San Francisco building cutting-edge technology every day. But the work cannot stop at the frontier. Someone still has to translate those tools into the lives and workflows of people who did not build them.
That is where I am placing my bet: on organizations, independent teams, educators, and creators who need AI to create leverage without adding more layers or more work.
The point is not to make every part of life more automated. It is to make more room for the things people are here to do: paint, draw, sing, clean up, care for one another, learn, create, and take care of the planet.
That is the role I intend to fill. I have applied for a position with OpenAI, and I am excited about the possibility of contributing to that mission. I am also building with people and organizations at different scales and looking for partnerships that will help me do this work well.
My bet is that the next wave of AI will belong not only to the people building the models, but also to the people who help everyone else understand what to do with them.
THE NEXT WAVE OF AI NEEDS PEOPLE ON THE GROUND.