People can learn skills from books, which are entirely passive. The learning process ultimately resides within the student; issues of motivation, morale, direction, diligence, discipline, time, and mental health matter a lot more than just going through some material.
No, but that's the thing I was implying (but haven't started clearly) - learning from books vs learning from an AI "teacher". Once the AI reaches a level in which it can "teach" then the game is almost over for that skill.
To clarify, I'd define a major component of effective teaching to be the ability to break down an arbitrary typical problem in that domain into sub-problems and heuristics that are "simple" enough to manage for someone without that skill. If an AI can do that, it can most likely effectively perform the task itself (which cannot be said for a book).
You could learn jujitsu with a training partner and a sufficiently advanced virtual instructor, not being able to position students directly is a downside but not a dealbreaker.
Maybe we'll see some sorts of manual labor as the last bastion of not automated, human performed work. Of the kind that demands a lot both from the human motor skills and also higher thinking processes.
