Interesting video, Jake.
There was a point that I disagree with. The video said that "For students starting a 4 year technical degree, this means that half of what they learn in their first year of study will be outdated by their third year of study."
In fact, this doesn't follow from "the amount of new technical information is doubling every two years."
First year students in any technical degree only learn the stuff that is uncontroversial. Stuff that's been known since the 19th century... and this stuff isn't going out of date. New information at the cutting edge of science doesn't change basic facts in algebra, calculus and geometry, nor does it change the basics of good experimental design (randomisation, repetition and control), or methods of doing simple analysis on the results from that experiment.
It is not until maybe at the end of your entry-level four-year technical degree that you start getting exposed to newish results. But even then, if the information is being presented to undergraduates of any calibre, odds are on that it is not information that is going to become "outdated" in a hurry. Money talks and undergrads fork out a fortune for degrees that are expected to yield dividends.
Even after you start getting into the real meaty bits of science as a postgrad student or a researcher, you realise more and more how important that first year really was. And it doesn't matter how long ago you did first year for this to be true.
SATAN, a recursive acronym invented by GOD: "SATAN: Advocating The Adversarial Nihilist"