If I knew I'll die next week, would I try crack? Well, maybe - there's nothing to lose and they say the highs are pretty high. But if I found myself in a hospice tomorrow, would I regret all the crack I didn't try? No - the pluses I got from living a not-crack-addicted life seem pretty solid from where I stand.
For a less dramatic example: I think that, when the time comes, I won't regret most of the time I spent programming. By being aware of how often people regret the time they spent on a dead-end job I've made the kind of choices that gave me a good life-work balance while keeping me working on interesting stuff. Of course I'm also severely underpaid, but middle class and happy seems better than rich and miserable.
I admit this is entirely emotional, but when I learned that Hollow Knight[0] was made in Unity, it broke my heart. A 2D game with a consistent art style (read: write the shaders once and forget it), made up entirely of flat surfaces with only a handful of different methods of movement, no physics to speak of, and only a couple hundred different types of enemies, most with large overlaps in AI save for bosses. Gorgeous game, strong art direction, thoughtful lore and story, but any game developer could probably write the engine for such a game in a couple weeks.
But every indie developer I've talked to about game engine development acts like it's a dark art. That it's just impossible for mere mortals to do such a thing, and if you do, then you'll never ever release a game, or you'll spend literal years on the engine. Again, I predict a couple weeks.
Back to the article, I dislike that 'game development post-unity' just means 'picking out a new engine'. Everybody's jumping ship to Godot or Unreal or whatever else because we all need a game engine. But why? Why is this song and dance necessary? I feel like since the author is a game engine programmer himself, this option should have come up higher on the list along with the non-engine libraries and frameworks.
It's a can of worms to make a game engine for multiple platforms.
1. Huge oil and gas resources
2. Huge hydropower resources. 96 per cent of all electric power generation comes from hydropower.
3. Gigantic phosphate deposits.
4. Sensibility to avoid resource curse and invest excess money.
5. Fjords designed by Slartibartfast
I took this realisation to the extreme and decided to completely deprioritise classes in favour of homework and doing the reading in my own time. I figured the cost-benefit, at least for me, was much higher if I spent an hour doing as opposed to an hour listening.
This actually worked really well for me but that might also be because I often struggle with large classroom learning: the pace is either too slow and I get distracted or too fast and I can't keep up. But even when the learning is 'one-to-one' I feel like there's always the tendency for people to zone out and not raise an issue when they are either bored or did not keep up/understand.
I think you're right in that some of that might be the brain pretending that it understood when in fact it did not. Could it also be a social thing? Maybe because the other person expects you to understand and this causes your brain to try its best to believe that it understood when it did not.
Yes, this is my biggest gripe with learning as well. It's so individual that you almost need one teacher per student.