A junior developer used to wait days for mentor feedback. Now that loop closes in seconds.
This is not a small change.
When feedback is scarce, you batch your questions. You guess. You move on and hope. The gaps between learning moments stretch long. Mistakes harden into habits before anyone notices.
When feedback is abundant, learning becomes continuous. Small corrections compound. The rhythm shifts from episodic to constant.
We designed most learning systems around scarcity. Scarce experts. Scarce attention. Scarce time. AI changes the supply side.
I keep noticing people talk about AI like it’s a wave that’s about to hit them.
“Will it take my job?”
“How do we adopt it fast enough?”
“How do we protect ourselves?”
Those are understandable questions. They’re also a little late. If AI can do your job, the problem isn’t the AI. The problem is that your job was never designed to require the human part of you.
Most organizations have spent decades trying to remove judgment from work. Scripts. Processes. Compliance. “Just follow the playbook.” It worked because humans are …
A lot of people are treating AI like it’s going to replace “thinking.” It won’t.
What it will replace is the comforting illusion that thinking was optional.
AI is great at producing an answer. It’s terrible at taking responsibility for one.
It can generate a strategy, a lesson plan, a policy, a diagnosis. But it can’t own the consequences when the strategy fails, the lesson lands wrong, the policy harms someone, the diagnosis is incomplete.