 I'm excited to speak here today. I looked at the list of attendees, and it seems like every one of you is a leader in the education establishment. And you all have a very, very strong bias toward progression in the world of education. I'm sure that lots of people have covered lots of subjects that are education focused today. And I've got a particular perspective on it. But I thought I'd start with a few comments on the social, economic, and political environment that I think we're in right now. Because I think we've reached an inflection point that's particularly important to everybody in the education establishment. And what I always find fascinating when I read the news is not the things that are stated in the news, but rather it's the things that occur and the implications that are unstated in the news, or rather the news headlines that aren't written but should be. And I think this is the most momentous year ever in this business. So I want to make a few comments on that. And I'm going to discuss how this relates to education too in my speech. About two weeks ago, or three weeks ago, Apple came out with an announcement for a new smartphone, the iPhone 5S. At the same time, it released a product called the iPhone 5C. What was covered was 9 million units moved in the first weekend. What wasn't said was equally important. And at the same time, Apple released an operating system, iOS 7. And throughout the news organizations, it got barely a tweet, maybe one paragraph mentioned. Now, what did I see? Well, the iPhone 5S is obviously the biggest product launch in the history of Apple. It was and will be the most successful product Apple has ever created. They're going to sell 100 million copies of one computing device in 12 months. They're going to sell 100 million copies of it and generate about $75 billion in revenue. That much is very clear. Nobody wrote this. It's going to be the most successful product Apple ever created, but it's also going to be the most successful computing device ever created. And if you follow that train of thought for a bit, it's about to become the most successful consumer device ever created. And that makes it the most successful product ever created. And it all happened a few weeks ago. In the history of the world, Apple put a product on the market that's the most successful one in the history of the world. Now, along that line, something else happened which is fascinating. We saw in the area of mobile phones what we're seeing this transformation where it's increasingly clear that anybody that can have an iPhone wants an iPhone, but Apple came out with the 5C and the 5S. And it turns out that everybody wants the 5S. It's been a gargantuan success. 12-year-old girls want the 5S. 75-year-old senior citizens want the 5S. It used to be there was a bifurcation or a segmentation of the market based upon consumer preferences. And senior citizens would want something different than a 45-year-old professional. And that would be different than a rich person. And that would be different than a poor person. That would be different than an uneducated person or a young person or a male or a female. But we're seeing actually the collapse of all these segmentations in the area of computing. And it was very, very clear and punctuated by this product launch. That's, of course, one of the reasons why it's possible for Apple to create the most successful product in the history of the world. It's also the most profitable product, by the way, in the history of the world. They're gonna generate a 40% margin on $75 billion in revenue in 12 months. Never before accomplished with an airplane or an automobile or a television. Anything anybody can think to produce. We've never done it before. And the spectacle, by the way, what they put in that product was a 64-bit chip which nobody really wrote much about. But one of the implications of the 64-bit chip is now you can take slow-motion video. That means that every 12-year-old kid sits and takes slow-motion video of their friend jumping into the pool. They post it on Facebook. To tell all their other friends, they now have the coolest phone in the world. And I watched this happen. I watched college girls posting slow-motion video on Facebook because they want their girlfriends to know they've got the coolest phone. The iPhone 5C has a 32-bit chip and it doesn't have slow-motion as a camera option. You can't do it, therefore you can't be cool. Cool is 64-bit chip. Since when was cool ever a 64-bit chip? The iOS 7 got released on Thursday night. By Monday morning, there were stories that were 200 million downloads. Now what was that in iOS 7? Well, lots of interesting things, but two very powerful things. One was something called iTunes Radio. Apple shipped free digital radio to 200 million people in 72 hours. Another thing was an upgrade to FaceTime. FaceTime was Apple's, in essence, digital technology for video conferencing. They've had it in the product for quite a while, but it's never really been focused upon because lots of people, me included, don't want to show our face if we make a call late at night or early in the morning or we don't want people to see what we're wearing or if you're not wearing makeup, maybe you don't necessarily want to make a video call. So we use audio calls. Apple's known for being brilliant marketeers, but I find it very amusing to see their anti-marketing. They actually came out with a product called FaceTime Audio. And FaceTime Audio is merely the FaceTime without the face. But if you were to call it what it is, they came out with free phone calls. But they're not gonna call it free phone calls because Verizon and AT&T sold more than half of those nine million iPhones that weekend. And it's probably offensive to the telcos to release a product to 200 million people in 72 hours, which makes phone calls free. Now, why do I fixate upon this? Because that makes iOS the single most successful service delivery in the history of the world. And that's the headline that didn't get written that nobody focused on. And it's worth a 10-page journalistic piece, right? A company figured out how to release a service interesting to consumers ages three to 80, they delivered it to 200 million people in 72 hours. We've never delivered anything of substance or value to 200 million people in 72 hours. And they did it, right? And more to the point, it's now inevitable as you look forward another 12 to 24 months that will reach the iOS 7 point where they will release something to 500 million people in 72 hours. And that puts the writing on the wall. There's a global wave of technology coming. I wrote a book called The Mobile Wave, I wrote about three years ago, and the thesis was computing and software has become so cheap to provision that this technology wave's gonna sweep over the planet. And I think right now it's pretty clear that we're moving toward a world where five to six billion people have a mobile computing device. We're gonna have 950 million smartphones sold in the next 12 months. That means that we're moving toward a world which is about everybody of consequence has a computer in their hand or in their pocket. Now something else is happening, right? Two more headlines that you sort of read. Microsoft took a billion dollar write off on Surface about a month ago. Blackberry took a billion dollar write off on the new Blackberry smartphone. What you're seeing, by the way, and what you have seen is the implosion of Nokia and the implosion of Blackberry. What was the significance of that? Those were the two leading non-American telephone companies, right? The two leading non-American smartphone companies they imploded in the last 12 months. Now it's been coming for three or four years. Anybody in the tech business knows it's been coming. It was inevitable, like water flowing downhill, because as the value proposition of the phone became more and more software infused, if you didn't have the best software in the world, you couldn't possibly hope to compete. So Blackberry explodes, there goes one Canadian player, Nokia explodes. Nokia, for those of you who remember, in 2000, I actually declared somewhere here in DC that I thought that we would eventually get to the point where you could provision education for free online. And in 2000, Nokia was the most valuable company in Europe. 13 years later, Nokia is no more because they missed the software wave. It turns out it's easier to predict the future than is to make money off the future. For those of you who follow this, it's pretty inevitable that education is going to be highly automated. It's a question of when it would take place. But in those past 10 years, Nokia disappears as a player, Blackberry disappears as a player, and the entire mobile world collapses into a standard which revolves around Apple Computer as the leader, and Google is the number two. The number three is rapidly emerging to be Amazon. HP, Dell, Lenovo, all falling by the wayside. Another headline that dropped in the past 12 weeks that got a big ho hum, beyond was we've reached an inflection point, we sell more tablet computers every quarter now than we sell PCs. That means that the center of gravity of corporate computing has just flipped from the PC to the tablet computer. Most people didn't grasp that part. The center of gravity or the leadership in the entire software industry flipped to the mobile operators as soon as we shipped more smartphones than we shipped PCs. But the smartphone is not routinely used for corporate activity, the tablet is. At this point, that headline could be read as the last straw and it marks the end of the era of Microsoft and the beginning of the era of Apple and Google as the dominant players in enterprise computing. The stock market figured it out a while ago. Consumers figured it out a while ago. Corporations have been dragging their heels for 36 months and for the ones that didn't move rapidly, they'd said something like, oh well, we don't trust the iPhone, it's not secure, we trust the BlackBerry, that's secure. That's our standard for enterprise mobile computing. Or we're gonna wait and see what Microsoft is gonna do. The significance of those other headlines is just about everybody in the corporate world is throwing in the towel now and they're not waiting for BlackBerry to deliver anything, as you can see. BlackBerry's probably not gonna be a company in 12 to 24 months. They're not waiting for Microsoft to deliver anything either. And the significance of that is not that they needed Microsoft to deliver anything, we never needed them to do it, we just needed them to get out of the way. And Microsoft has in essence thrown in the towel and declared, actually thrown up its hands and declared it doesn't really know what to do. You couldn't really characterize as any other way it's a company that just spent $8 billion to buy Nokia because Nokia was the last company creating a Windows phone of consequence and if they didn't buy Nokia, there'd be no major phone manufacturers working in the Windows operating system. They'll throw $8 billion into that deal, they will spend another $10 billion trying to make it work, it will ultimately fail. Wall Street figured that out because the day they announced the deal, Wall Street knocked down Microsoft's market cap by 20 billion. And funny enough, that's kind of what I calculate they're gonna waste on that detour. And they didn't do it because of some brilliant plan because at the same time they announced that they have no confidence in their CEO, he's gotta go, they need some new guy, they're not sure who that's gonna be. Again, not a vote of confidence. Conclusion, everybody in the corporate world is now stampeding, avalanching toward the Apple standard if they can afford it and the Android standard if they can't afford it. If you look at all the segmentation in the marketplace, every person of economic consequence in the world with a 90% likelihood is stampeding toward the iOS. Apple is winning this market everywhere in the world on the high end and where people just can't afford it, where you can't get into that business, you go where the Android is the number two, the rest is going to become inconsequential. Now, all those facts mean different things to different people and most people, they can see the writing on the wall, they're just afraid to admit it to themselves because it's a little bit too scary. But let me tell you what I think it means. I think it means that we're about to move into an era, a global wave of prosperity and a global wave of trade, but there are certain global standards that are emerging, English, the dollar, American customs, American law, American commercial values and American cultural values. They're all flooding the five to six billion people on the planet that actually are literate. There's one billion people on the planet can't read, they can't read because it's too expensive to read, they will be drawn into the literal world and will probably get to stability at the seven to eight billion person point. Now, as you notice, I made a point, Nokia and BlackBerry weren't. We're seeing a collapse around networks that emanate in the Western world, especially America. Why Facebook, why Amazon, why Google, why Apple? For those of you who follow marketing, this was a salient year, a watershed year, the most popular brand in the world for the last 12 years and maybe for the past 50 years. It's Coca-Cola. And the greatest export of America was sugar water, and the sign of global trade was Coca-Cola for who knows how long. And this year, the brand became Apple. Apple became the number one brand that was written about, it's a big deal. Apple's number one, Coca-Cola's number, it's not number one. What wasn't written about, who knows what the number two brand was? Do you guys read this article? All of a sudden, Apple dethrones Coca-Cola. It wasn't just Apple that ran past Coca-Cola. Coke was number one, Apple became number one, Coke slipped to number three. Number two brand is Google. Okay, and people look at these things as, oh, it's just some marketing guys on Madison Avenue had something to say. It isn't. It means that Apple and Google are the two most trusted ideas on the face of the earth. The two most trusted, most credible ideas on the face of the earth. The reason that people trust Coca-Cola is they could crack the can and drink it and it wouldn't kill them and they know what it's gonna taste like. There's a certain comfort that comes with the credibility and the certainty of the brand. When the number one and the number two player in mobility and in computing become the number one and the number two brand in the world, that's a very interesting inflection point because it takes me to another observation, right? These are the two platforms across which every piece of software is gonna run over the next decade, maybe the next two decades. 10 years ago, right, and I lived through the first big wave of technology, the internet wave, and during the internet wave, something less than 5% of the economy dematerialized the software and the big winners were the e-bays and the AOLs and Netscapes and Amazon and Yahoo and the rest. Well, now we're living through the mobile wave and the difference is in the mobile wave, something on the order of 50% of the economy is gonna dematerialize into software. You know, the stock market still hasn't hit the exuberant highs we hit in 2000. However, people are starting to sense this, right? What happens in a world where half of everything of consequence or value on the face of the earth becomes software? Well, it's gotta run on something. What's it gonna run on? Well, I just told you what it's gonna run on, right? It's gonna run on smartphones and tablet computers. They're gonna be running Android and the iOS. It's really not possible for anybody to squeeze into that space easily at this point. Now, why this other global wave of consolidation? Well, the combination of the internet and technology and mobility tipped everybody toward American standards, American currency and American language. There's something else that happened. The rise of the EU broke down the currency and the customs and the languages of every major country in Europe, right? The French, the Germans, the Italians and the Spaniards entered into a voluntary coalition to trade with each other. And then they woke up and realized that they needed all to learn English to trade, okay? So Germans sell French cars in English. And they dragged the other countries like the Greeks into this coalition and the Greeks had to abandon their currency, the drachma. If you're gonna abandon your currency for a currency set by some bureaucrat in Brussels, why not just go ahead and abandon your currency for a currency set by some bureaucrat in DC? You think the Greeks trust the French or the Germans more than they trust the Americans? Well, we could test that hypothesis, right? There's $5 trillion worth of currency trading every single day. The UN recognizes 190 countries. There's less than 190 currencies called 100 currencies. That makes 100 by 100 matrix. You could trade the Euro versus the Yen versus the Russian currency versus the Brazilian Real. You could, in theory, there's Cartesian product, 100 by 100. 87% of all currency trades are against the dollar. The US economy represents 20% of the worldwide GDP. So on a GDP weighting, it ought to be 20, 25%. Maybe you go to 40%, 87%? Well, that means 13% is everything else. That is the rise of the American currency. For those of you who wonder, why is it that interest rates are so cheap? Why is it that the Fed can print a trillion dollars worth of paper every year as part of easing, monetary easing, or stimulus or whatever they want to call it? Why do we print $80 billion per month or something on that level? And the world absorbs it all. And we don't have inflation. Chavez had 49% inflation in Venezuela. That's this year, 49% inflation. What happens when you engage in irrational economic policies, your currency collapses? But for whatever reason, ours didn't collapse. And the answer is because the American currency has subsumed the entire world. And we've done it because all the Europeans gave up control of their currency. When they did that, they gave up control of their customs, customs meaning the trade flows. And with that, they gave up control of the law, right? Because at this point, if half the economy is software, and if you want to win that software war, you have to have the best product. And when you have the best product, you can ship it to a million people, 100 million people or a billion people, all for the same variable cost. Which means there's a dynamic that takes place. A Western company dominates the largest market, the US market, that allows them to win Australia, Canada, South Africa, all the global multinationals and everybody in the EU. Once you win that market, you've got 70 to 75% of the purchasing power on earth, then you take over the rest of the market. It's impossible. Name a company that came out of Japan in the software business that's of consequence to us. Now, that being the case, every single place that the software industry touches, it breaks down the local markets and the local providers, right? If I can create a product that answers you a question, like Google, there's not gonna be a Turkish version of Google. There's not gonna be a Brazilian version of Google. You ask a question, by the way, in Google and the English language, you get a better answer than if you ask the question in the Brazilian language. Interesting. You speak English, you'll get a cheaper product, you'll get a larger market, you'll get a higher price, you'll get a faster answer, right? There's just more, right? Where English is the Latin of the modern era and it's getting more powerful. But ultimately, what do we have? We have a billion person network. Google's a billion person network. Facebook is a billion person plus network. Those networks are infusing the rest of the world. China can't stop them, nobody can stop them, right? As those networks spread, people wanting into those networks have to play by American rules, American laws, American customs break and American law on gambling, American law on pornography, you don't get on the network. Somebody in DC, a regulator shuts you down, you get locked out of the network, you get locked out of the world's commerce. This is interesting dynamic because the other way to get on the network is to buy advertising. When you buy the advertising, you're gonna have to buy it in dollars from Google or from Facebook. Therefore, you better have currency that converts to dollars. If you don't play in our currency and if you don't comply with our laws and if the regulator is in the right way, don't wish to recognize your product or your service or the legitimacy thereof, you can't get on the network. If you're off the network, you end up like Cuba or like North Korea. What happens when I get things for free on the network and they cost money off the network? How many people are familiar with, well, you know, you notice there was some Google Maps, right? Google came out with maps that were plugged into satellites and satellite images. Apple decided they needed something better. How many people have used Apple 3D maps? Okay, if you take Apple 3D maps and you fly through Manhattan, you actually see the buildings. If you take Apple 3D maps and you zoom to South Beach in Miami, you can fly around the building. You can count the number of levels. You can see the swimming pool behind the wall. You can look at the shrubbery and the hedges. And so, how do they do that, right? They must have flown drones with 3D imaging cameras over every city. Now it turns out that they imaged South Beach up to 42nd Street. I have a house, 48th Street. So when you go from downtown up to 42nd Street, everything is a beautiful three-dimensional image. You can fly around. If you wanted to buy a house, you can actually see the house in the neighborhood. It's like taking a helicopter around the neighborhood. Helicopters cost $1,500 an hour. A rich person that wants to go shopping for real estate pays $1,500 an hour. That's what I did in the year 2000. I've got helicopters, I fly around. Helicopters are dangerous. They're scarce, they're expensive. If you're gonna die in the air, you're probably gonna die from a helicopter crash. It's 20 times more dangerous to find a helicopter than this to fly in a fixed-wing airplane. But you know, if you make $27,000 a year and you're looking for a place to live, you probably can't afford the helicopter. But if you have an iPad and you pull up Apple Maps, you now have something better and it's free. And you don't have that on Blackberry Maps. You don't have that on Nokia Maps. The reason Blackberry's gone and Nokia's gone is because if you can't afford to buy a drone and fly it over every single neighborhood in the world, people aren't gonna want your maps anymore. Okay, so Ergo, it's a billion-dollar buried entry to be in the mapping business. It's going up. And here's the last point I have. I have a house on 48th Street. When you fly over all the houses south of me, they're all three-dimensional and vivid and beautiful. You get to my house, I'm living in Flatland. My image is a satellite image, which was magical three years ago. Today, I look at my house, I live in Flatland and I think no one would wanna pay as much money from my house as they'd pay for a house five blocks to the south. And it irritates me. It irks me. Apple put me in Flatland. Software is spreading everywhere on earth. Next time you decide where to live, you're gonna want to fly around and see the neighborhood. When you look at how good that school is, you can see the school in three dimensions if you don't live in Flatland. Everybody's probably gonna wanna move out of Flatland. Right? Now, what's this mean to education? Well, it seems increasingly clear we're moving toward a world where billion-person networks are going to spread, right? The first era of mobility was the era of consumer identity. The big applications are consumer apps, QtC ones, Gmail, you know, and Apple Maps and Twitter and Facebook. You are who you say you are. But nobody ever got out of jail with their Gmail account, right? Nobody ever went to a bank and said, here's my Twitter ID, give me money, right? You can't do things of consequence with consumer identity. We're not moving the era of corporate identity and civic identity, right? And if you can identify yourself corporately with your phone or you can identify yourself civilly, I am a student and enrolled in elementary school, I am a police officer, I am a citizen of the country. At that point, all of the civic processes and all of the commercial processes that currently have been relegated to be non-automated procedures, they're all going to become automated. Right now, the standard for doing anything of the consequences I show up in person with a photo ID at a bank teller to take a test, right? To withdraw money, to borrow money, to get a fishing license, to get a driver's license. All these things have to be done to vote. Maybe people don't like you have a photo ID to vote, but most things. That's all gonna change and as that changes, we're gonna see a very interesting thing, a new era of process automation, right? And the procedures in our life that didn't get automated during the last wave, the internet wave, will get automated during the mobile wave, you know, getting a prescription from your doctor or writing a traffic ticket. If I can dematerialize your civic identity to your phone, then you can take that and you can open up a bank account in Oregon in 30 seconds while you're sitting here in this conference room. That's never before been accomplished, it will be accomplished. And that changes things dramatically. I think coming back to education, it's pretty clear here that we've reached a point where you can teach people things using computing devices. I think there's a classification of things we teach in the world that are more challenging than others. If you wanted to make it very simple, you would say we have science and we have humanities, right, one hand or the other. I went to MIT and there's science on this hand, there's humanities on that hand. And teaching ballet or teaching drama with a computer is a bit more challenging than teaching math or science. But it's an irrelevant issue because the primary economic value of education to the world today is science, technology, engineering and math, what they call STEM. And the irony is STEM has been used as a buzzword to get funding for educational organizations everywhere, aggressively, like a beating of a drum. But the one headline that I haven't read about STEM, which is the most obvious one to me is that that science, technology, engineering and math are almost certainly things that a computer can teach you better than a person can teach you. And a computer can certify you better than a person can certify you. So if there's anything that is destined to be completely 100% automated at science, technology, engineering and math. And I think you could probably show right now that a computer program would teach you mathematics a lot better than a human being. And we know as soon as a computer program teaches you math better than a human being, the variable cost of education goes to zero. Now tablet computers are going through the floor. Amazon just came out with a $220 tablet device. Why? Because they're number three, they have to. Bezos said, we don't intend to make money off the device, we intend to make money when people use the device. So what happens when you get to a $200 tablet computer and you have free Wi-Fi? If it lasts for four years, you're down to $50 per year. What, by the way, Bezos bundles a bunch of stuff into the tablet computer, Google competed with Apple by giving away Android for free, Google thinks about ad financing it. What happens when someone gives you a mobile device and gives you a free college education with the device? And you might say, why would anybody do that? Well, the answer is why wouldn't they do that? LinkedIn trades at 20 times revenue. LinkedIn trades at 20 times revenue. Facebook trades at 20 times revenue. Zillow, Zillow, the fun application that we use to do home shopping on our tablet computer, trades at 20 times revenue. Okay, when's the last time this all happened? 1999, that's when it happened. And you remember what happened then? When things start to trade at 20 times revenue, it means an essence that the marketplace has become electrified, things hit a plasmatic state, there's massive amounts of energy to do anything that captures the public imagination. And at this point, you could argue that it would be in the best interest of LinkedIn to take $2 billion and embed a complete education curriculum, whatever it might be is give it away for free to the planet if you join LinkedIn. What's their monetization strategy? It's recruiting. It's easy, right? Facebook could do the same thing. Facebook's worth $135 billion. What if they just give you free K through 12? You think I can teach math, calculus, algebra, geometry on a tablet computer with a piece of software? Of course I can. How about how to build a bridge, right? If you play with cut the rope or you play with the games like water, things that teach hydraulics or they teach rotational physics, it becomes very, very clear that all of those things are taught better on a computer. Almost by definition, any laboratory exercise in an engineering school for an undergraduate has to be a very controlled experiment because otherwise we would burn our 19-year-old students to death, right? Think about the liability of letting kids construct their own bridge with real steel or play in a lab with a virus, right? We don't really let 19-year-olds or 21-year-olds play with fire, not a lot of it, little fire, right? I mean, who builds their own jet engine, life size? You know, I have two jet engines on the back of my airplane, they're 15,000 pounds of thrust each. That means technically it can lift 15,000 pounds straight up in the air. You got to let a 21-year-old play with 15,000 pounds of thrust, put a hole in the roof, right? So, bottom line, we have controlled experiments. There's no better way to teach people engineering and hydraulics and physics and math than a controlled experiment or a simulation running on a tablet computer. And there are no better simulations than the one we've seen. When Apple released their iPhone 5S, they showed a 64-bit chip. This is great, 64-bit chip. And no one has any clue what a 64-bit chip does. So they said, well, look at this game. This is a dragon flying through the air, breathing fire, and we've rendered it perfectly. Do the 64-bit chip. It's a simulation of you fighting a fire-breathing dragon. That's the best idea they could come up with. But I went to MIT and studied aeronautical engineering. I can think of some better simulations to put on a 64-bit chip would have economic consequence to the world. You know, the only other practical application we saw was I spent all weekend recording 12-year-old boys running and jumping into the water and I hit slow-mo and it captured 120 frames per second and you could see the kids spinning like this. Now, I said before it's hard to teach ballet on a computer, but I didn't say you couldn't do it, right? Because a 64-bit chip that captures 120 frames a minute combined with the M7 chip which keeps track of your time and motion at a gyro compass, combined with a watch that has Bluetooth may very well allow you to watch someone's motion of their arm as they conduct music against Beethoven and give them a grade, right? Or watch the swing and the motion of a golf club or capture the frames as you spin around or capture your center of gravity. All of these things are coming, but the most obvious thing that's coming is someone's gonna write a program that teaches you algebra and they're gonna release it to one billion people. And that's gonna be a better way to learn algebra than any other way we came up with the last 2,500 years. So, for education, I'm not gonna talk about individual education initiatives. You look around the room, there's a hundred different education initiatives going on here, right? All I'm gonna say is the obvious at this point. There's probably two billion people in the world that wanna learn something at any given time. There's seven to eight billion people on the planet. Just do the simple math. Somewhere between one and two billion people would like an education in something. The most economically valuable education you can get is a science, technology, engineering, and math education combined with the ability to speak English. All of these things certainly can be taught for a variable cost of zero on a piece of software running on the iOS or Android. Someone is gonna spend one of those programs and release it. If Apple may very well make iOS 9 the version of Apple that teaches you everything scientifically related, K through PhD. And then in 72 hours, 800 million people will get something embedded in the operating system called I, K through 12. And if they don't do it, then Google will do it. And if they don't do it, Jeff Bezos will do it. And if they don't do it, then somebody at Zillow or LinkedIn or Facebook is gonna do it because there's effectively infinite money running after good software related ideas right now. Those companies that trade at 20 times revenue do so because they're pure software plays. And the perception is, if they get it right for 10 million people, they'll get it right for 100 million people. They'll get it right for a billion people. And then they'll get the next five billion people and there's no stopping them. Now, I'm not gonna say Apple and Google eat the world. That's not my point. My point is I think we're gonna see an incredible renaissance in the software business and you're gonna see dozens or hundreds of great international networks form. They may not all be American, but they'll be Western networks coming out of the first billion consumers because that's the marketplace capable of catalyzing the global dominant player in any given field or segment. Will there be one education network? Probably not, but there are economies of scale here that you can't look beyond, right? And we're transitioning from a world where for 2,500 years, we taught 20 people at a time calculus and algebra. And now we're gonna be in a world where one person can write a program or one team can write a program that teaches 250 million people at a time. And the other day I looked at just another one of these MOOCs that came out and just it struck me, it struck me. In this day and age, learning anything in a classroom of 20 people is about as good an idea as growing food in your backyard. Right, because a garden is a garden for 20 people. You're gonna grow food for 20 people at a time in your backyard. You're gonna have one person teach 20 people anything. Well, it is true that there are some things you can't teach to more than 20 people at a time. I get that. Those aren't gonna be the revolutionary things that drive the civilization forward. Cooking and ballet and your interpretation of Shakespeare, that's not what's going to drive the civilization for the next decade. The things that are revolutionary are gonna be the ability to teach somebody computational fluid dynamics for a nickel. The ability to create a, you can create a person with a PhD in mathematics for $50 a year. Right, we know we can do that at this point. Has it been done? No, but is it inevitable, we're gonna move toward a world where it costs about a million dollars to convert a three-year-old kid into a PhD. We're gonna move toward a world where it's gonna cost something other than $1,000. And every single field where you can do that is a massive amount of money you can make. Massive amount of money. It's an economic opportunity for a non-profit or for a for-profit. And that's my closing thought. Are we done at a time? Thanks for your time.