Self Taught -> Already is curious, be default, so 99%-100% are curious. Just by the nature of going out of the way to learn something.
Educated -> Also has a curious % in the group, but also has the large group of complacent "i heard software makes money so i'm hear to learn it, but i don't know what i'm doing". So when you do find complacent, they mostly came from the educated path.
Curious people got high on the caffeine and code, and the other group just got high.
"Locking-in" on some esoteric topics just because one wants to is probably the best way to improve in my opinion.
On the other hand I have been through a pretty generalist undergrad education in engineering and it helped in acquiring general math, physics, chemistry knowledge.
I was already a nerd when I was attending the university. My chance was my instructors and professors let me roam free and convert every assignment to a rabbit hole. Poisoned by demoscene earlier, I was already an elegance/performance freak before even I got graduated, and this made me dive into unknown territory head-on instead of being afraid of it.
I have written a compression algorithm from scratch for graduation, then written a multi-agent trading system for M.Sc. project. For Ph.D. I have written a BEM based material simulation which was able to saturate the system very effectively, reaching practical IPC limits of the processors it ran on.
> Self Taught -> Already is curious, be default, so 99%-100% are curious.
There is some of this but IME that % is half your estimate, if not lower.
It could be different in today's market because CS IS NOT where a lot of jobs are, and my observations are based on when it was very very hot, so there's that.
But, no matter what you or I say anecdata is not data, but in my 30+ years of doing this, I find these broad generalizations mostly wrong.