Throughout history, humans have always sold their skills. It’s how we survive.

The skills you choose to learn at a young age will have a huge impact on your life, shaping not only your career but also your mindset, lifestyle, and relationships.

Choosing the right skills to develop is one of the most important decisions we make. I’ve seen many people choose the wrong skills—skills that are no longer in demand.

I’ve made those mistakes too.

That’s why, in this essay, I’ll try to explore which skills will be in demand over the next 10 to 20 years.

What should the younger generation focus on to stay ahead in the evolving job market?

We all live in an unfair world where doctors sometimes earn less than Twitch streamers. But why does this happen? It's obvious that doctors provide more value than Twitch streamers.

I remember an Instagram post where the earnings of Cristiano Ronaldo were discussed. It was hundreds of millions. One comment was like, "How does this happen when firemen, who save lives, earn less than a man who kicks a ball?"
I call this Scalability of the Skill. A doctor or fireman provides a large amount of value to a small number of people. For example, a doctor can save Bob’s life by performing surgery on a Sunday. Bob and his family will be incredibly happy and appreciative of the doctor. The doctor will be a hero to them. Bob’s family might pay all the money for this operation, and insurance can cover some expenses. Let’s imagine it costs $50,000.

So, we can say that the doctor can aggregate $50,000 for his skill in one day. Some of this money will go to the hospital, to companies that provide medical tools, pills, etc.

But the other 9 billion people on Earth don’t care about Bob’s life. They don’t even know he exists.

On the same Sunday, Cristiano Ronaldo will play in the Champions League, and 50,000 stadium attendees will pay, let’s say, $200 per match. For example, when Messi joined Inter Miami, ticket prices surged several times and might even cost $5,000.

For just one game, football clubs make millions of dollars because people want to see Ronaldo or Messi play.

Fans from other cities also buy subscriptions to watch the games on TV, while people buy merchandise, Coca-Cola, and Lays chips during the match.

What I want to say is that professional football and basketball players aggregate more eyeballs and revenue per "Saturday" than doctors because they can impact many people at the same time.

This happens with all professions, like actors, writers, athletes, influencers, celebrities, etc. The problem is that these kinds of professions depend on popularity. Only 0.1% of stars take 99% of the market share. Ronaldo, J.K. Rowling, and Will Smith make a lot of money, while unknown actors and writers make ends meet.

At the same time, the "star doctor" can make more than the "average doctor"—let’s say 10 times more—but the gap is not as vast as in professional football.
In today’s world, skills that impact a little but a lot of people work better than skills that provide a lot of value to just a few people at a time.

But at the same time, “scalable skills” are more risky. If you become a doctor, you will not be poor, and you will not be super rich. If you become an actor, you can be very rich or also very poor.

Once, I attended a small classical music concert. There was an orchestra of 20 people with violins, playing Vivaldi's "Four Seasons."

Only 100 people attended this concert and paid $40 each.

So, 20 professionals who spent 10+ years of their lives learning how to play Vivaldi’s pieces made $4,000 for this concert. (You can’t become a professional violinist in just 2 years of learning to reach a level where you can perform Vivaldi.)
I’m not including the marketing budget, advertising, or organizational expenses, so it was a very unprofitable business.

I started thinking about why this happens. The first idea is that there is nothing new in violin mastery, and Vivaldi’s Four Seasons is a niche that has been fully explored for the last 300 years.

Imagine how many people have played "The Winter."

Also, this orchestra is competing with Vivaldi and Spotify. Vivaldi, as a creator, can spread his art through different channels. Before, there were musical notes that other musicians used to replay Vivaldi’s works. In the pre-digital era, only professionals could perform these masterpieces because there was no recording technology.

Distribution models were limited to live concerts, which is why opera theaters were in demand. Orchestras could get a good salary even if they were simply performing Vivaldi.

Now, you can use Spotify or Youtube to replay Vivaldi for free without paying a lot of money to musicians.

Over time, Vivaldi’s brand has become more powerful, but the salary of those who can “replay” it has decreased. The skill that they have to master (Play the violin), however, remains the same, and it is still very difficult to reach that level of mastery.

It’s tough to compete with someone who lived 300 years ago.

There is an understandable roadmap for becoming a professional violinist. You go to music school, practice for 5-10 years, and if you can play "Four Seasons," you are considered a professional.

But this can’t be said about influencers or coders.

You can record a TikTok video and wake up famous. You can learn VibeCoding using AI or spend 2-3 years and become a good specialist. This happens because TikTokers and coders are relatively new professions compared to doctors or violinists.

If you consistently post one Instagram Reel for the next three years, you will build powerful influence and can charge thousands per post.

If you consistently play the violin every day for the next three years, you will have the level of a student and might not even be able to perform in an orchestra because you will be so inexperienced.

Three years in content creation—you're a famous professional.
Three years as a doctor—you're nobody.

In established professions, there are rules and clear recognition of who is a professional and who is a beginner. When you have these rules, you need to spend more time to achieve a "product-market fit" in your skills.

Reading the previous paragraph, you might think I don’t respect old professions.
I do, and also I belive that the profession you pick in your 20s shapes your mindset, and you start seeing the world through that lens.

I’ve heard plenty of people say, “I made my fortune doing what I didn’t learn in university.”

Does that mean university didn’t help them?

On this, I 100% agree with Steve Jobs and what he said in his famous Stanford speech about "connecting the dots." He learned calligraphy at 17, and at the time, it seemed useless.

But understanding how typography works helped him revolutionize the Macintosh interface.

Sometimes, the dots don’t connect until decades later.

It’s the same for me. I graduated as an architect. My first job was doing 3D renders. In university, I was planning cities. 20 years ago, that didn’t help me. But now? I’m building software.

I’m using my knowledge of how people move through cities to figure out how they interact with apps. In the city, you need to figure out how to get from point A to point B. It’s the same in apps.

If you choose journalism, I guarantee you’ll become a content creator. If you love shopping, you'll start an Instagram about fashion. If you’re good at math, you’ll be a coder. If you played the violin, maybe it’ll be hard to get rich playing “Four Seasons.” But if you can do it, it means you're a master in music.

That’s your first dot. The second dot can be anywhere. Maybe someone will figure out how to treat diseases by listening to music. Who knows?

So, what I’m saying is: when you choose a skill, it’s not about “how will you make money.” It’s about “how will you see the world.”

When someone pays money for your skills, it means you’re in business. It could be your own business, even if you’re self-employed, or it could be someone else’s business.

Every business has 3 main processes:

1. Create the product (coders, product owners, builders, service providers—this is about creating value).
2. Sell the product (marketers, influencers, salespeople—this is about getting money for the value).
3. Support these two (accountants, lawyers, HR, warehouse departments—this is about making sure value creators and money creators work smoothly).

In some businesses, creating products is the number-one process. For example, ChatGPT and other tech products. It’s not hard to tell more people about OpenAI; the real challenge is creating a product like OpenAI.

In ordinary businesses like fashion, real estate, or agencies, creating the product isn’t the problem. The main issue is selling it.

99.9999% of businesses are ordinary and struggle with sales. That’s why Facebook and Google are so big—they help ordinary businesses find customers.
The more ordinary the business, the more it shifts from product creation to marketing.

It’s tough to create microprocessors, but it’s easy to find customers.
It’s easy to make dresses, but it’s tough to sell them on Instagram.

That’s why influencers are so in demand. OpenAI won’t pay Instagram influencers for endorsements, but dress vendors do.

But if you don’t have a product and marketing, you don’t need accountants, lawyers, HR, etc.

What I’m saying is that in any business, the "service process" isn’t the main thing, and that’s why those departments end up at the bottom of the food chain.
The most in-demand professions are about selling products and creating products, not about serving.

If we add scalability of the skill to this, we’ll see that the two professions that dominate the market are influencers and web developers.

Web developers are in demand, especially today when AI can scale skills even more. A small team of tech-savvy people can create a product that can be used by millions.

What’s the similarity between Ronaldo/Messi and web developers? They both can generate millions of eyeballs for one unit of time and sell products on a massive scale.

Ronaldo/Messi do it through the screen and the stadium. Developers do it through code and web interfaces.

Messi, Ronaldo, and Taylor Swift are content creators. Sam Altman and other OpenAI developers are "product guys."

Both of these skill sets are scalable and new.

That’s why, in my opinion, people have to decide who they want to be: product developers who make the world better with their products, or influencers who tell the world about these amazing products in a fun way.

These two skill sets are at the top of the food chain, and that’s why people with these skills earn more.

Other professions are about serving these two.

But that doesn’t mean you have to be a TikToker or a web developer.

For example, if you understand human behavior and know how people make decisions, you can be a good marketer who understands which TikTokers to hire.

If you don’t like to code but want to build products, you can be a product designer. For example, I can’t code, I can’t do web design, and I’m not a big influencer. But I’m running a tech company for content creators. I decided to develop my skills in the content creation industry and web development.

The main question about different skills is: Will they be replaced by AI? Because nothing is worse than spending 10 years learning a skill that will be replaced in 99% of use cases. For example, translators. Learning a foreign language is good, but building a career as a translator is something I wouldn’t do.

Throughout human history, we’ve seen many professions replaced by the industrial revolution. One of my favorites is the knocker-upper—someone who would wake people up in the morning by tapping on their windows with a long stick or a similar tool. With the mass production of alarm clocks, this profession disappeared.

But at the same time, some professions evolved. For example, carriage drivers became Uber drivers. In my essay about marketing and startups in ancient Rome, I talked about tabellarii—an early-stage food delivery startup.

Some professions evolve, some don’t change (e.g., waiters), and some disappear entirely.

That’s why we need to figure out which types of jobs AI will have the biggest impact on.

Spoiler: I don’t know.

Even the people who are creating AI don’t know. It’s like the person who invented the internal combustion engine didn’t know it would replace knocker-uppers.
But we can try to figure out who will be replaced first.

Okay, let’s think: In what area is AI performing the best? For me, it’s only in the digital space.

Ironically, AI has had the greatest impact on the web development industry. The biggest venture capital investments are in AI tools for web developers. But I don’t believe AI will replace developers. I’d say that people who don’t use AI will be replaced by those who do.

The second area is the content creation industry, especially in text. Translators and copywriters have taken the biggest hit from AI. For example, before AI, creating this kind of essay was very hard for me.

English is not my native language, and I was always paying for translators who knew English but were also not native speakers. Every time a native speaker read the text, they could feel it wasn’t right.

So, the quality was worse. The price for creating one piece of content was expensive.

Now, I can do it for free, without any help, and very quickly.

The same goes for web developers. I remember when creating a website was rocket science. After 2015, with the no-code era, everyone could build a website by dragging and dropping different blocks. Today, you just prompt, "Create a website for my marketing agency." It still doesn’t work perfectly, but it's just a matter of time.

It sounds like AI will replace creators and developers, but not everything is so clear.

As Luc Besson said, “AI can’t create Léon, but it can easily create Léon 2.”
AI can replace my translator, but it will not replace the person who translates agreements about nukes. That will always be a human (for the next 50-100 years).
The more complicated the task, the more creative it is, and the more responsibility it carries, the less impact AI will have.

In my essay The End of Following, I touched on the history of tech development. New technology allows more people to do the stuff; it’s not replacing them.
The same happens with writing and filmmaking.

200 years ago, most people couldn’t read and write, but today it’s the standard of education.

100 years ago, making a video was a privilege for the very rich. Today, my parents can easily record a video.

Every era gives birth to its "J.K. Rowling" and "Christopher Nolan".

What I want to say is that AI will replace mediocre specialists, like a content manager who writes articles for a cooking blog. But at the same time, there will be a lot of opportunities for the next Martha Stewart, who will have their own cooking blog or show and will make millions.

While writing this essay, I realized something important:

AI will replace average content creators, but it will help brand creators get rich.

Branding is all about trust.

As I mentioned earlier in my essay about how to build trust, trust is built when people consume your content consistently over time.

What’s the difference between finding a cooking recipe on Reddit versus on Martha Stewart’s blog?

The recipe might be exactly the same — but it’s shared by people with very different levels of trust.

The same principle applies in business.

AI will replace mediocre engineers, but it will give more power to system architects.

And by “system architects,” I don’t just mean web developers.

I mean anyone who can build and structure systems — whether it's a content brand, a construction company, a restaurant, or an online platform.

That’s why in the AI era, it's not enough to be just a creator or a technician.

The real opportunity is to become a brand or a system builder.

I can’t say in 100 years, but in the next 20 years, I’m 100% sure that AI will not fully replace industries that exist between the digital and real world. For example, architects, interior designers, or builders etc.

Of course, there will be many tools that help architects do their jobs, but there are things that happen offline. For example, a builder might forget to install hydro-isolation. And ANY AI won’t detect that in the near future.

Another example is a plumber or roof repairman. Yes, these professions are about "serving" and not creating or selling. But these jobs require fine motor skills that robots don’t have and won’t have in the near future.

I believe AI will learn how to make apps or movies, but I don’t believe in a robot that can replace a plumber and change pipes in my bathroom in the next 20 years.

Also, there are many people who want to be creators or developers, but there aren’t as many who want to be plumbers. Maybe in the future, it will be easy to hire a coder, but to hire a plumber, you might be waiting 2 months.

You can use your skills to create a product and scale it, or you can scale offline skills with digital technology. A great example is Brave Gals. She has service skills that are tough to monetize offline, but showing these tips online allowed her to gain 2 million followers on YouTube.

It’s the same with Messi and Ronaldo. If they played football without broadcasting and the spectator stands, they wouldn’t earn a lot. Athletes started making more money only when TV came into our homes.

So, combining “old-school, offline, boring skills” that can be leveraged by modern tech and mass broadcasting could still be valuable.

I remember when my grandpa told me a story about when his professor at university said, "The new generation is crazy, lazy, and doesn't want anything." This was in the 1960s.

Finally, I can say something bad about the younger generation too 😂

Gen Z and Gen Alpha are super tech-savvy and modern. My generation can’t compete with them in creativity and intelligence. They are smarter.

But there are some skills the younger generation lacks, and one of them is patience (focus and consistency).

I also had a problem with these skills compared to my parents, but the issue of focus is becoming worse for the younger ones.

I’m not here to say "we’re better than you"—I just want to highlight one area that, if you master it, will make you better than others.

When I started my career in 2010, my main weapon was being effective and modern. I was an architect, and only a few senior specialists could do the job on a computer (3D rendering and digital drawing).

Technology was my advantage. But nowadays, the younger generation is super tech-savvy. They all have social media, and they all know how to use computers. It sounds funny, but in 2010, not everyone in my profession could use laptops.

Now, not everyone uses AI, but in the next 5-10 years, all creators, developers, and the "digital generation" will be armed with AI.

One of the key advantages in this competitive area will be the ability to focus and be patient.

Try to watch yourself. Are you reading this article in one go? Or did you read for 3 minutes, get interrupted, and plan to continue tomorrow? Can you focus on watching a 1-hour tutorial video without interruptions?

It’s hard, right? For me, too.

Patience applies to all areas of your life. Are you able to pass the "Marshmallow Test"?

Can you wait 10 years for your boyfriend or husband to get rich, or do you want everything in 1 year?

Can you wait months, just building a friendship with a girl before inviting her "to visit your place"?

Can you post 100 videos that don’t get any views and continue doing it?

One of my favorite parts of an interview with Mr. Beast is when he said that some people come to him asking why they didn’t get views.

His answer: "The first 100 videos won’t get views. A If they haven’t posted 100 videos, there’s nothing to talk about." Here is original video

But if you’re here, congratulations, because 99% of people can’t read this essay all the way through.

Don’t try to fix these people. The majority will not focus. That’s why it’s easy for us to sell them the idea of “watch short reels” and “get rich quickly.”

Don’t try to change it.

Use it.

As Steve Jobs said, “All great things were built by a team, not by one person.”
Managing people is one of the greatest skills, and it can’t be replaced by machine. It’s very hard to figure out if a person is a good leader or not. There’s no test for this.

Management is a topic for a separate essay.

I just want to say that investing time in developing entrepreneurial/management skills is a smart decision.

Don’t confuse influence with management. They’re both about leadership, but they’re completely different.

Human mentality is based on a tribe mindset. The leader sets the goals and organizes the tribe to get things done. He or she manages people.

That’s why I completely believe in the AI agent concept, where AI acts like an employee. But I don’t believe in AI managers.

At least not in our lifetime.

People will give orders to AI to perform tasks, but I can’t imagine ten people sitting in a Zoom call, taking orders from an AI robot. That would be a revolution, like in the Terminator movies.

Also, with the TikTokification of society, people are becoming more isolated. 10-20 years ago, you had to go to the office, and you automatically socialized. The situation pushed you to communicate with people. It’s much easier to manage people in the office. It’s much harder to do it when the work is remote.

That’s why there will be a big demand for managers who can organize a very effective remote team.

If you want to become a professional at something, you have to spend time on it.
And you can only spend a lot of time on something if you truly love what you do.
A good sign of this love is when you constantly think about how to become better at your craft.

At the beginning of writing this essay, I simply typed “curiosity.”

But after the tenth revision of this article, I added “self-development.”

You need to be curious about how to grow in what you love to do.

I once watched an interview with Aleksandr Karelin, the most dominant Greco-Roman wrestler of all time — a three-time Olympic and nine-time world champion.

He said:
“Life is a fight. You just have to choose where your fight takes place — on the wrestling mat or on the ice.”

From my side, I’d add:

The problem is not choosing the place you fight —
it’s when you don’t want to fight at all.

Because when you’re truly fighting, you’re curious about self-development.
You care about getting better.

Your “fight” could be on YouTube — battling with other creators to get more views.
It could be at a hackathon, a fashion show, or a startup pitch event.

Everyone has their own “wrestling mat.”

The danger is when you have no mat at all.

I remember when I was a kid, I wanted to become a professional soccer player.
I didn’t care about anything else. I trained constantly.

At the same time, I ignored school, and my teachers told my parents:
“There’s going to be a problem with this boy — he’s not learning anything.”

Now I see their mistake.

They were focused on whether I cared about ‘serious subjects’.

But they should’ve looked at something else:
Did I fight? Did I have my own ‘wrestling mat’? Was I curious about getting better?

So, if you’re young and already have your “fight”…
If you’re deeply curious about something —
and the adults around you don’t understand it…

Don’t worry. Just keep fighting on your mat.

I’ve been thinking about if I had a Genie from Aladdin’s Lamp, and he told me, “I’ll set up a skill set in your kid’s brain that you want. Tell me what.” I wouldn’t be too confident because it’s easy to miss.

For example, when I went to college in 2007, no one thought about becoming developers or content creators. Everyone wanted to be economists or lawyers. At that time, web developers were considered "nerds."

I would bet more on skills that will 100% be in demand.

There are: managing people, being curious, being ‘in a Fight’, having patience, being focused, selling, creating products, creating value, and understanding how to scale skills using tech and AI.