Tanks won't be dead until there is another system that can fullfil it's role. It's easy as that.

Everything else is just adaption to changing threat environments while doing it's job on the battle field. Which specifically means more active defenses over passive armor, so soft- and hard-kill APS and probably an highly-automated small calibre remote weapon station.

Also, no matter how hard people try to delude themselves: The war in Ukraine is NOT a modern war shaping future combat. It's primarily characterised by obsolete static and trench warfare with both sides severely lacking capable air defense and experience in proper combined arms warfare. Then Russia aggrevates that situation even further as "We can't compete on the high-tech end of things so we drag everyone down to our level via a massive electronic warfare campaign" is part of their main strategy since the cold war.

That's the reason drones are so successful there, because they perfectly exploit an existing gap of lacking air defenses and a very taxing environment that benefits cheap mass spam over electronically impaired high-precsion tech. That's also the reason the Ukrainian side learning and adapting more quickly will win this.

The actual aspect of this war shaping future combat is detailed information on how to not make the same mistakes and close the existing gap cheap drones so perfectly fit into. So no, the tank isn't even close to obsolete. The next generation will show APS alongside limited in-build anti-air capabilities (small calibre gun against small drones probably alongside a few missiles that can double against out of range/LOS ground targets) and be accompanied by more dedicated anti-air assets once again (see: how those old German Gepards that were designed for that support role back then performed in Ukraine against drones half a century more modern)... and by IFVs nearly as well protected and basically being their flanking protection against infantry/ATGMs (see: active and passive protection levels of modern IFVs and their precisely timed burst-capable auto-guns - basically oversized battle field shotguns to clear the flanks off mobile but fragile threats).

Can't really occupy terrain with drones, you need something like tanks or IFV's to actually do that. I'm by no means an expert, though.

Others said it better, but:

It depends on what, and where, you're fighting.

I would also like to know how a large, expensive, relatively cumbersome, vehicle can possibly defend itself against hordes of cheap, mass produced flying explosives. I bet you could build thousands of drones for the millions each of these cost.

Honestly, the last few years of imperialist wars of aggression highlight how a military industrial complex becomes not only a liability in geopolitics and domestic political corruption, but also in war readiness and capability. When you have entire for-profit supply chains structured around delivering specific weapon systems for decades, they become entrenched as more of an implicit profit driver than a matter of national security.

Bulldoze the trenches

Now given how expensive tanks are I do think you would be better off going just ifv and then smaller cheaper lighter drone tanks. You get a Bradley and two tank gun drones for the price of one abrams. I would argue that is a superior unit.