I also consider myself largely self-taught in the subjects I genuinely enjoy and work with today - despite my academic degrees. Looking back on my academic years, I realize I “vibeschooled” quite a bit (or the pre-AI equivalent of it)—mostly because I was studying things I didn’t care about, with my main motivation being just to pass. The point I was tying to make on the post is that “vibelearning” in the same way as “vibecoding” (where code is the actual output) is inherently contradictory if it doesn’t result in actual, retained knowledge. When you vibelearn the wrong way, it’s easy to confuse the appearance of learning with actual knowledge retention. Great point about "going back and forth" under a teacher guidance. I haven't thought about this before, but I'm sure this is a great way of reinforcing learning and broadening perspectives. It's another behavioral dynamic that's hard to replicate through tech alone.

White-collar jobs will still exist in 10 years, and they will continue to exist in 50, 100, and even 500 years. AI is an immensely powerful tool that will boost our productivity more than the industrial and PC revolutions did. However, people and white-collar jobs will persist. The nature of work will evolve but imagine someone in 1925 trying to predict or understand the white-collar jobs we do today - they wouldn't be able to do it! People from 1975 might conceptualize our work, but they wouldn't grasp the scale or the technology stack. Just because we can't conceive how white-collar jobs will evolve doesn't mean they won't or that they won't continue to exist.