Next 18 months - Path 1 vs Path 2
Let’s talk about career paths. I need to take 4 courses before I can graduate and I have choice of spreading the load in next 18 months, or 12 months or just 6 months. 6 month likely means Sprited gets near zero focus. 12 month is restrictive. 18 month, I am making a bet.
Path 1 — Graduate ASAP, ride the hot market
Compress coursework
Enter market while demand for AI talent is high
Optimize for:
Compensation
Wealth accumulation
Stability
Sprited = nights/weekends, optional upside
Identity = senior AI engineer / staff / EM-track
This is high-certainty, high-liquidity path.
Path 2 — 1.5 year Sprited Runway + Graduate
One course per term
Primary focus = Sprited
Clear runway end date (~18 months)
Two possible outcomes:
Financing / revenue → salary
No traction → Job search
Identity = founder-builder first, employee second
This is the high-optionality, high-variance path.
Neither is irresponsible, They just optimize different things.
Checks
1. Future Regret
If you choose Path 1, will you regret it at 50? → Probably yes.
If you choose Path 2 and Sprited fails after 18 months, will you regret it at 50? → Less likely.
2. Recoverability
If Path 2 fails, what happens? → I still have MSAI, prior senior experience, real systems and ML work, a concrete founder story. I will re-enter the market slightly later. Not locked out forever.
If Path 1 succeeds, great but I will not be able to recreate uninterrupted founder runway again. Golden handcuffs kick in fast.
Recoverability is much higher from Path 2 to Path 1 than the reverse.
3. Market Timing
Yes, the AI job market is hot now. But here’s the uncomfortable truth:
You can’t perfectly time markets
The “hot window” narrative is often overstated.
Strong candidates with real systems experience are employable across cycles.
Meanwhile:
Founder time windows are personal, not market-driven.
Your energy, clarity, and life alignment right now are rare.
Market timing matters — but less than people think, especially at your level.
4. Financial Downside
Let’s be precise.
Path 1 downside:
Low financial risk
High opportunity cost
Long-term regret risk
Path 2 downside:
Explicit, bounded cost: ~18mo, 150k-200k burn
Upside: company, financing, or stronger job positioning
Path 2 has a known maximum loss.
Path 1 has an unknown long-term regret cost.
If I am going to take that Path 2, I will only take one course per semester.
2026 Spring - ML
2026 Summer - Ethics in AI
2026 Fall - AI in Healthcare
2027 Spring - Some other course
Or I could also do:
2026 Spring - ML, AI in Healthcare
2026 Summar - Ethics in AI
2026 Fall - Some other course
So, what’s the plan?
The plan is to build Sprited within 18 month timeframe (from 1/13/2026 to 7/13/2027).
During that time, I will take 1 course a semester including Summer.
I will take ML since that is prerequisite to others.
Quarter by Quarter Planning
2026 Q1 - SpriteDX Release (Musk-style) with Accounts and Billing, 10 users.
2026 Q2 - Machi Prototype, VC Outreach, Co-founder Search, 100 users.
2026 Q3 - SpriteDX 1000 users, Machi Online - Proof of Concept, VC outreach.
2026 Q4 - Funding.
2027 Q1 - Machi Release.
2027 Q2 - Machi - 1000 users.
Provisions
If big financial event occur, we reevaluate using the spreadsheet.
Cap yearly burn (living, etc) at $100k.
If no financial promise (verbal funding potential, or revenue) is seen at the end of 2026 Q4, 2027 quarters will accelerate to job hunt.
Escape hatch framing: “I took a planned two-year window to build an AI product from first principles while completing my MSAI, then decided to return to industry with much sharper judgment around ML systems.”
Immediate Next Steps
- Drop 3 out of the courses out of 4 for this semester.
— Sprited Dev 🐛
