1) Being vaguely aware that something exists and knowing you can Google for it.
2) Having such a deep, intuitive understanding of said thing that you can actually use knowledge of that thing to solve complex problems.
There is a big difference between copy-pasting shit from stackoverflow and reading the whole documentation to understand why the hell this method was written this way.
I'd say the latter is much more "buffetian".
Which isn't very useful when you come to something 18 months later wondering "why" rather than "how". Because "why" is often more useful than "how" when you are trying to troubleshoot something.
I guess it could be condensed to wisdom over knowledge, but how do you tell people that wisdom is valuable when they clearly don't want to hear that? Wisdom takes time and effort, knowledge is a copy and paste away.
It's not deep part of your mental model if you have to Google for it. Though sometimes just having an awareness of something so that you can recognize this is a situation where it's useful and now is when you should Google for it is useful.
Learning shit deeply is such a game changer. There is no substitute.
Seems like a good deal of my job as a software engineer.
"The next gig economy will be on-demand knowledge" (2019)
https://qz.com/work/1527544/the-next-gig-economy-will-be-on-...
I'm a programmer but when I watch machining videos on YT I discover solutions to problems I've never thought would exist.
For example, in deep learning research, good labs were using good initialization functions before somebody bothered to write a research paper explaining why it was good idea. If you didn't work in one of those good labs and so were never told to do that, you would just struggle and say "yeah these deep nets suck they don't even converge".