The Future Is Physical – Neel Somani on Innovation, Leadership, and Real-World Impact

Neel Somani has built a reputation as one of the sharpest minds bridging the worlds of blockchain, artificial intelligence, and applied research. A UC Berkeley graduate, Somani’s path has been shaped as much by the mentors and peers who guided him as by the rigorous academic foundation that continues to support his work today. From early stints in software engineering and finance to founding Eclipse and exploring the future of distributed systems, Somani’s journey reflects both a bias toward action and a thoughtful awareness of when to pause. In this conversation, he shares lessons learned, the importance of fundamentals, and where he sees the next wave of innovation taking shape.

Neel Somani

Can you share how your journey at UC Berkeley shaped your career path?

It's funny because as a student, you're constantly told that your classes don't matter, and you should focus on your network. It's true that the people you meet in undergrad will heavily shape your career. My friends and mentors are the ones who recommended I start as a software engineer at Airbnb, transition to finance, and even start a blockchain company. So your network definitely matters. But what I didn't expect was that my classes mattered quite a bit, too. When I was transitioning from crypto to AI, I could always lean on my fundamentals in computer science. A lot of the background that underlies machine learning and distributed systems is best learned in an academic environment. Of course, you can learn things on the job, but it sure helps to be able to quickly prove trivial facts, like how positive semidefinite matrices have all non-negative eigenvalues.

What inspired your transition from academics into applied research and entrepreneurship?

One reason was just my opportunity cost. When you can enter the industry and immediately learn what's the bleeding-edge in a real company and also get paid a substantial amount for the privilege of doing so, the alternative of doing a PhD starts to make less sense. Many of the professors who mentored me in undergrad even recommended industry, and they mentioned that if the tech industry had as much funding when they were graduating as it has now, they probably would have chosen industry instead. That was a strong signal for me to start applying my skills in real-world domains.

How did the idea for your first major project or company come about?

It was my friend from Berkeley who introduced me to his roommate, who was the General Partner of a major crypto venture fund. The GP pitched me a few different ideas, and at the time, the most compelling option to me was to start a project on what was then a rapidly growing blockchain. That blockchain ended up failing catastrophically, but not before I made a splash in the crypto industry. A lot of smart folks reached out to me and pointed me to research that led to my company, Eclipse.

What are two or three of the most important lessons you’ve learned along the way?

So this is controversial, but what I've found is that when you have something that's going to work, whether a company, or an approach to your personal health, or something else, it tends to work quickly. That's not to say that you should give up on things early. You have to see things through to completion. But what I mean is that if you're not seeing very fast progress after seeing something through to completion, then you need to pivot fast. There is no point in trying to force a direction that's not working. A more concrete example, I've been struggling with my shoulder mobility for years. I tried tons of physical therapists over the course of years. Finally, I found the right one, and I regained full mobility within a month. That's how fast it happens.

Another hard-earned lesson is that when you're negotiating, if you give someone a good deal right off the bat, you're still going to get a counteroffer. That's a painful lesson for me, because I try to come out of the gate with a proposal that's really strong for both sides. But sometimes people take that as a sign that you have more to give, especially in the context of employment discussions. It's a shame, and I still give my strongest offer first, but I know to sometimes expect pushback, and I try not to be too disappointed when that happens.

What makes your work or your approach different from others in this space?

I've noticed that great leaders systemically have a bias toward action. That is a trait that is generally useful. Sometimes, though, you're in situations where pausing or even doing nothing at all is optimal. There's a saying, "Never interrupt your opponent while he is making a mistake." I find that sentiment to be often true. So my approach is usually a bias toward action, but I balance that by checking myself in those rare situations I'm passing through a one-way door.

Is there a routine or practice you follow that you’d recommend to others in this field?

I love this book called Nonviolent Communication. Satya Nadella at Microsoft apparently recommends this to all leadership within the company. The premise of the book is that when you're in a heated disagreement, the first thing you need to do is identify the exact feeling that you and the other parties are experiencing. That might sound simple, but we often say things are feelings when they're not feelings at all. Just getting extremely good at guessing how people are feeling has been a superpower in establishing shared understanding and making people feel sufficiently heard, while not wasting time.

What advice would you give to someone who wants to follow a similar path?

Anyone who's giving advice right now is making stuff up. It's impossible to predict what the world is going to look like after sufficiently advanced artificial intelligence is deployed. That being said, it's hard to imagine that fundamental skills like math or philosophy will work against you. For the students I mentor, I'm trying to make sure that they're at least entering environments where they're surrounded by the smartest people. Those smart people will guide you when you're no longer sure what to do.

What do you see as the future of your work and of the industries you’re in?

It's repeated all the time, but the next wave of advancement has to be in the world of atoms, not bits. That means that software companies or merely advancing foundational models will eventually not be the highest margin return action for smart engineers and mathematicians to work on. The next frontier might be manufacturing, robotics, supply chains, biology, and other physical fields, which are all receiving tons of venture capital funding right now. I'm personally excited about automating the work in "meatspace" or the real world.

Somani’s perspective is both pragmatic and forward-looking: networks matter, fundamentals endure, and the future lies not only in code but in transforming the physical world. His reflections highlight the speed at which meaningful progress can unfold, the importance of surrounding oneself with brilliant people, and the value of clear communication in leadership. As industries shift from bits to atoms, Somani remains focused on applying technical expertise to real-world impact—an approach that will no doubt continue to shape the frontier of technology.