硅谷教母与密涅瓦创始人警告AI将加速淘汰平庸名校及不称职教师

硅谷教母与密涅瓦创始人警告AI将加速淘汰平庸名校及不称职教师 在知识触手可及的AI时代，常春藤盟校依靠背景而非能力的学位信号价值面临破产，而无法转型并提升教学有效性的传统教师将被AI彻底取代。 在AI重塑教育的背景下，圆桌嘉宾深入探讨了传统教育体制面临的危机。密涅瓦大学创始人本·尼尔森犀利指出，美国名校由于过度依赖富裕家庭背景，其学位的“信号价值”在AI时代将加速失效，并警告若80%以上的教师持续保持低效，将被AI彻底取代。与会专家一致认为，未来的大学需要重塑为服务终身学习的模式，传统讲授法必须让位于同伴协作的项目制学习。在知识触手可及的未来，批判性思维、系统性思考、关系智能和团队协作等“越来越像人类”的核心软实力，才是人类不可替代的护城河。 本·尼尔森指出，随着AI时代加速到来，美国名校的筛选机制正逐渐失效，无法提供真正优质教育的名校学位将迅速贬值。 (0:00) 埃丝特·沃西基认为AI能成为每个学生的专属无死角导师，但必须警惕虚假信息与道德风险，教育应当转向培养批判性思维。 (0:00) 伊莎贝尔·豪将AI比作教育界的“WD-40”，提醒人们不能仅用AI提高现有教育的效率、复制过去，而应借此重新想象教育的本质目的。 (0:00) 本·尼尔森提出教育界存在“老师和学生做得越少越开心”的“魔鬼交易”，而AI的出现极易助长这种双方都学不到东西的惰性。 (4:59) 在知识与方案可被机器轻易获取的AI时代，人类的核心价值和任务不再是寻找答案，而是对多种方案进行评估、审视与抉择。 (4:59)

在硅谷101年度科技大会上，密涅瓦大学创始人本·尼尔森、教育家埃丝特·沃西基与斯坦福学者伊莎贝尔·豪指出，随着AI迅速普及，依赖死记硬背与被动讲授的传统教学模式及名校学位的“信号价值”正面临瓦解；教育体系唯有转向培养学生的系统性思维、人际协作与终身学习能力，并将低效的教学常态升级为以审视抉择与人际联结为核心，才能避免在智能化变革中被淘汰。 破除被动灌输与教训惰性的“魔鬼交易” (4:59) 埃丝特·沃西基从一线教学经验指出，绝大多数大学仍沿用的单向讲授法极度低效，研究显示学生听讲座后只能记住约1%的内容，阅读仅能记住5%，而同伴协作的项目制学习才是最高效的学习路径。她虽看好AI成为每个学生随时答疑的专属导师，但担忧现行学校仍在让学生死记硬背上世纪的问题。面对制度性阻力，她建议学校采取渐进式改革，先从改变20%的课时结构切入。 本·尼尔森则揭示了教育界长期存在的“魔鬼交易”——教师与学生都倾向于投入最少精力应付差事，而AI极易沦为助长双方偷懒的加速器。他强调，在机器能够轻易生成知识与解答的时代，人类的核心价值已不再是寻找现成答案，而是具备审视、甄别与抉择的能力。伊莎贝尔·豪补充认为，AI应扮演解锁深层议题的“万能润滑剂”，若仅仅将AI用于提高传统灌输的效率，本质上只是在低水平上复制过去。 名校“信号价值”贬值与大学终身化重构 (9:59) 本·尼尔森对以常春藤盟校和斯坦福为代表的美国精英教育筛选机制提出了强烈抨击。他指出，过去30年常春藤等名校入学新生的核心共同特征并非考试成绩或种族，而是来自“百万富翁”阶层。在AI出现之前，企业雇佣这些平庸但有背景的毕业生代价有限；但在AI驱动下，企业要求员工输出远超以往的高倍数生产力，依赖宽松打分混文凭的名校学位的“信号价值”将加速破产甚至沦为负资产，这也是公众对高等教育产生信任危机的根源。 伊莎贝尔·豪进而提出未来的大学必须被重新设计。随着人类寿命延长与职场环境的多变，大学不能再仅服务于18至25岁的年轻群体，而必须打破年龄壁垒，重塑为贯穿个体全生命周期的终身学习、技能提升与再培训平台。 系统性思维与社交智能构成不可替代壁垒 (19:59) 针对AI时代不可替代的核心竞争力，本·尼尔森结合密涅瓦大学的核心课程指出，未来的关键在于培养“系统性思维者”。这一能力要求个体能将复杂数据与方案拆解为核心组成部分，重构出独特方案，并精准评估其在现实中落地时的二阶与三阶次生效应，最后进行清晰传达。这一高阶思维需要多年的跨场景刻意练习，而传统学校体系对此几乎毫无准备。 与此同时，嘉宾们强调了人际情感与社交特质的刚性需求。对话援引数据指出，90%的初创企业失败并非因技术欠缺，而是归咎于团队成员沟通不畅与人际摩擦。埃丝特分享其通过将70人班级拆解为4-5人小组以强制培养协作能力的经验；伊莎贝尔强调人类大脑具有高度社交连结的天性，AI应被用于自动化繁杂的行政任务，从而解放教师去专注于人际互动、情感启发与关系智能。 教师质量的正态分布与AI替代的临界阈值 (29:59) 对于“AI是否会取代教师”的普遍焦虑，本·尼尔森从统计学分布给出了冷峻判断。他分析称，当前教学质量在正态分布中的中位数处于“无效”区间，实际只有约16%至17%处于均值一个标准差以上的教师能达到优质标准，超过80%的教师教学成效并不达标——正如大多数成年人若突击参加当年的高中或大学期末考均难以合格。 本警告称，只要80%教师低效的现状不改变，AI淘汰低效教师就是必然趋势；只有通过体制改革使优质教学成为常态中位数，人类教师才能真正保住职业阵地。与会学者最终达成共识：AI不会替代优秀的教育者，但善于运用技术的教师必将取代拒绝变革的教师。 本场对话指明了技术浪潮下教育系统面临的深刻矛盾：AI的发展令文凭筛选机制与死记硬背的低效教学无可遁形，但如何将占人口80%的普通师资拉升至优质水平、打破如“教会般难以撼动”的学校体制，并平衡AI辅导与人类真实社交心理需求，仍是未解的制度性难题。

[4:59] 本·尼尔森: 老师和学生做得越少，双方就越开心 [4:59] 本·尼尔森: 在AI时代，人类唯一的价值就在于“审视与抉择” [9:59] 埃丝特·沃西基: 改变学校就像改变教会一样困难。 [9:59] 本·尼尔森: 在AI时代，如果员工不能创造10倍于以往的生产力，企业就会倒闭。 [19:59] 本·尼尔森: 系统性思维 [19:59] 伊莎贝尔·豪: 越来越像人类 [24:59] lack of communication skills [24:59] Isabel: deeply, deeply social [24:59] a world where I don't want to live in. [29:59] Ben: midpoint of the normal curve of teaching is ineffective. [29:59] Ben: so long as that is the case, AI will replace teachers. [29:59] teachers who do not know how to use technologies will be replaced by teachers who do.

[0:00] AI来了,我们的教育体系应该如何变革呢?我们将这个问题问了问美国最顶尖的教育学家们,而他们也非常担忧。Ben Nielsen是美国著名创新大学Minerva University的创始人。那他在我们硅谷101的年度科技大会现场就犀利地指出他认为说当前美国名校的筛选机制因为AI的到来将加速失效而无用的学位将一文不值而我们也将有着硅谷教母之称的Aster Wachewski请到了现场Aster是美国知名教育家与畅销书作者被誉为硅谷教母她也是激励了包括Steve Jobs本人在内的众多硅谷领袖同时也是三位硅谷女性领导者的母亲分别是Susan Wojcicki也就是YouTube的前CEO二女儿是Jenna Wojcicki是加州大学旧金山分校教授而三女儿是Ann Wojcicki,是著名公司23andMe的创始人兼CEO而Aster就认为目前的教育方式非常的不高效所以,最后我们还请到了斯坦福大学的Axcelerator for Learning的执行董事Isabel Howe她也认为只将教育停留在大学层面是远远不够的那么这场对话非常精彩也是这几名美国顶级教育专家对AI到来之际我们的教育方式应该如何去迎接变谷的深度思考非常推荐大家去听听那么以下就是我们硅谷101的年度科技大会活动的现场end you listen to the question. This is the live event of the World War II of the World War II. transformed how we live, how we work, and of course, how we learn. And I'd like to ask three panelists, when you think about AI and education, especially when we look forward, look towards 2030 and beyond, what excites you the most and what concerns you the most? Maybe I can start with Esther. So what excites me the most is that AI can be a tutor for every single student. They can ask questions. They can ask it over and over again. They don't have to worry about being stupid or anything. And they can get answers right away. And that was not the case before. And I think all teachers should use AI as tutors in the classroom. Unfortunately, I think, you know, we all have exciting ideas over here. I think that what we need to do is try to get those ideas across to the teachers. Because right now, I don't know how many of you have kids in the school system, but they're still doing the same old thing, memorizing answers to last century's problems. And what concerns you the most to use AI? Well, with AI, what concerns me, it's growing really, really quickly, and hopefully ethically. I think the ethics and the deep fakes and all the fake news and fake information out there, that concerns me the most. So I think it's important to teach kids how to think critically, and they learn to do that by actually making mistakes and doing it again, not by you telling them what to do. I totally agree. And what about you, Isabel? Yeah, what excites me the most is education has not worked for many, many children and adult learners. And so here we have a technology that suddenly unlocks profound questions, profound possibilities. [4:59] We call AI the WD40 for education. It's unlocking new questions such as, you know, what does it mean to be future ready in this age of AI? What is the purpose of education? Things that we have been wanting to ask for a long time. So I'm very, very excited about all those new possibilities. And then what concerns me the most is right now AI is used for a lot of efficiency applications in education, which is good. But if we stop there, we risk replicating the past as opposed to reimagining the future, which I think is what I'm most excited about with this technology is new possibilities. I'll give you my concern first and then maybe what I'm excited about. The concern is based on the state of our education system. When I was looking for a school for my eldest daughter about 12 years ago I tried a school that was a performing arts school for academically gifted children That's kind of an interesting combination. I asked the son of the founder who was giving the tour as a principal, I said, how did your mother come up with this idea of an art school for academically gifted children? He says, she didn't. She wanted to start an art school. She had no care in the world about the academics whatsoever. So in 1981, she used the California state standard curriculum that everybody was using, and we never changed it. And now, which was 12 years ago, we're a year and a half ahead of the rest of the state. And why do I bring this up? I bring it up because there is a devil's bargain between teacher or professor and student, which is the less work they both do, the happier they both are. And AI can turbo charge that like nothing else. AI can make the teacher's job much, much easier. It can make the student's job much, much easier. And there no learning that happens on either side And that the biggest risk because the incentive system of everyone involved in the certification or otherwise what known as the education sector is to do as little work as humanly possible. The opportunity and the opportunity with every new technology to Isabel's point is not how to take that old technology and jam it into the current system, it is to say, wow, this old system doesn't work whatsoever. What kind of system, what kind of educational path is now enabled that couldn't be done before? And that is the big opportunity that AI unlocks for those bold enough to think in that way. Well, thank you so much for sharing your excitement and concerns. With all things AI has brought to our life and will continue to bring to our life, I do think our education system will have to go through lots of change, lots of transformations to meet the new learning needs and also the shifting workforce expectations. So if especially universities actually, because they are preparing our students for their future career So if today you guys were given an opportunity to redesign universities what would your university be like Maybe I'd like to start from Ben, because you have already started this vision and mission ever since you founded Minerva University, which, by the way, is a huge success. Congratulations. Thank you. Well, Minerva was certainly built because of my mistaken assumption, or one of the reasons it was built, my mistaken assumption that basically AI would be widely available circa 2012. So I was off by a few years in that. But I built a university that asked the question of what does it mean to be human when access to knowledge, and not just knowledge, but to solutions is readily available. And when you think about that paradigm, what's left for human beings is to judge, is to discern, to make decisions. Because we may outsource a lot of work to the machine, but I don't think anybody here would be excited if a machine determined your tax rate. You want to be able to decide, you want to be able to participate, to govern, to work, [9:59] And the discernment, not in the black and white, because it's obvious when something is true or false, or at least it used to be, but in the black and gray, when there are certainly wrong answers, though, again, we are getting worse and worse and identifying what wrong answers are, and there are many potentially correct answers. an AI who is going to produce in a blink of an eye a whole number of completely plausible scenarios and so like what the video said which I disagree with it's not about knowing how to ask a question it's knowing how to evaluate the answer that comes out of that asked question the ability to discern actually means that students would need to learn significantly more than they did in the past not less and that really is the big challenge. How do we turbocharge what it is that students are able to do coming out of education and the disparity in that world between those who are well educated, not well certified, well educated, actually know how to discern versus those that don is going to be colossal Thank you Isabel you have worked for Stanford for several years What is your future university look like Yeah I would love to see universities take advantage Universities, and by the way, innovators in the room, take advantage of one major demographic and then workforce change that's already underway, which is that we are living longer lives. all around this planet, and universities have tended to focus on one specific age group, which are those generally 18 to 25-plus-year-old young adults, when in fact you have this entire demographic that's growing, that's also looking at continuous and lifelong learning. So I think there's a huge opportunity that universities and new models of adult learning should take advantage of. It's also the nice thing about it is that it's also consistent with what we are seeing in the future of work or this future that's already here, where the number of occupations that any one of us will hold in the future will continue increasing and rising So not only discernment which will be key and critical thinking and all these critical skills but also adaptability and frankly upskilling and reskilling that will need to happen a lot more in our future So I would love to see, and there are already many models that are focused on this, but universities and new models focus on these older adults that will need more and more and want to continue learning. That's a very good point, Esther. What about you? so I'm very practical because I'm a teacher and I can tell you in the university the majority of teachers, professors lecture and it's very hard to change old patterns of behavior and so how are you going to change that? That's the thing that I am concerned about. Turns out that lecture is the least effective way to educate. people remember 1 of what they heard in a lecture The second least effective way is reading a book That I think they retained about 5 So what is the most effective way Most effective is peer-to-peer project-based learning. When you do something that you want to do together with your peers, a project you come up with yourself, then you remember. So what I think AI can do is help teams of kids working on projects and help them understand what the mistakes are, what the things are that they should not do or whatever. And I think all AI, all interaction should be done in groups, group of two or three, because we're then training kids to work in the real world. All of you work in teams. I'm sure that none of you are working totally by yourself. So why not train the kids for the world that exists, the world after they go to school? Train them to work in groups, on projects that they personally care about. Also, I'm very realistic that changing the school is kind of like changing the church. Okay? [14:59] Never going to happen. So I shouldn't say never, but it's a little hard. So I think we should change just a small percentage, maybe 20% of the school time at once, and then maybe move to 30%. Let's see what we can do to actually change the school so that more kids can do at learning that matters. Well, thank you so much. Actually, I can't agree more when you said, like it's very difficult to change the school system. And especially nowadays, actually, we are still having this very much linear learning journeys from K-12 to higher education. People collect a high school diploma, a bachelor's degree, and then a master's degree, and a doctorate degree. So in your perspective, what do you think about how the future will hold the values for those degrees? Do you think they will still have that much value, or you think something new will come up, some new learning pathways will come up? Want to take a question? All of you guys actually You can pick it up Well sorry to say I think that the value of these degrees is going to be diminished as long as those degrees are not tied to the real world and are not tied to things that you can actually do to make the real world better. So I think we need to change the way we educate. And I think every single class in all universities should have a project-based element that kids can work together. So one of my grandchildren goes to UC Berkeley. I can just tell you that the class is there about 500. 500. They're sitting there listening to a lecture. Actually, I can tell you most of those kids are thinking about what they're going to do after they get out of the lecture. So we need to do something else. give them an opportunity to work on whatever subject it is that they're studying in teams. And that's what I think is important. I think that the four-year degree will continue holding a lot of value for some people. And then we will see continued rise of alternative credentials that are much more focused on skills I mean the future is showing us already that there will be more and more smaller credentials or career technical skills that are rising already today with AI. So I think this will probably be a mix of the two in our future. And I'm hopeful as I'm not as negative because I'm teaching at Stanford, For the class, that's project-based, so maybe I'm seeing already some elements of Esther's vision happening in big universities. So does anybody here know, if you look back 30 years on the incoming class of an Ivy League class, Ivy Plus class, Stanford, etc., What is the only characteristic that was shared by the majority of the incoming class? Grade point average. Over the last 30 years. No, not grade point average. Well, for the majority, I guess they had some high class rank. Test scores. Some high test scores Well that what they value I talking about demographically White Nope No not white Nope, not the majority. Millionaires. The majority of the incoming class in the Ivy League for the last 30 years were millionaires coming in. That is who these universities select. and in the world before AI to hire the idiot children of very rich people was fine because they were maybe 20% less productive than deserving students who weren't born into wealth but that's not true for UC Berkeley UC is not Ivy League so not Ivy Plus that's different well UC is better it's different different organizations and so you have a very low tax in the past on hiring well-connected, kind of dumb people. In the world of AI, when your employee base is not producing 10x on a per person basis of what the current employee does, your company is out there. [19:59] of business. Now, this may not be next year, the year after, but certainly within a decade. And so the signaling value of a degree, which adds empirically no benefit to its graduates, zero, is going to quickly match its real output. The signaling value of these degrees is going to become a negative so long as those institutions do not educate. And in a world where you do not have to go to class because the lectures are useless, you don't have to do anything in the exam because a 36 out of 100 correct will get you an A because of a curve. And where you cannot flunk anything, the value of that degree is going to be reflected in society. And in fact, that is what we are seeing today. The broad attack on American higher education, whether you agree with those tactics or not, I happen to not agree with them. But there is a reason. There is not a public outwork about what happening today to universities It because we have lost faith in those institutions and that will be reflected in employment Very interesting sharing. Thank you so much. And putting degrees aside, in my personal opinion, I think the most important thing will always be skills and competencies. And in the AI world, I'd like to ask you three, what do you think will be the most important skills and competencies we need to have to help us stay relevant and also competitive in the AI world? Ben, you have the microphone. You can start. Well, when I built Minerva University, we identified more than 80 of these skills and competencies which made up our core curriculum. And the reality is that in order to be able to understand the world around you, you cannot really distill your needs, your capabilities into something very narrow. The reality is you have to be a systems thinker. And if you want to be able to understand things systematically, you have to take a proposed solution or a set of data. You have to break it down into component parts that make sense You have to then be able to reformulate those component parts and come up with a unique solution You have to take that unique solution and understand what happens when you actually implement it in the real world, what are unintended consequences or second or third order effects that can come up with that. And you have to then be able to explain what it is that you've come up with. Otherwise, anything you've come up with is irrelevant. And that process has dozens of skills that are built into it, dozens. And you not only have to know what those skills are, you not only have to be able to become an expert at deploying them, but you have to be able to know how to deploy them in radically different contexts because you don't know what is the context that you're going to encounter it in. And in order to do that, that takes years of study, practice, and deliberate recontextualization. And that's, of course, what we've done at Minerva, but it is not how traditional education institutions are set up. Esther, you were about to say something. Well I yes I think that all kids coming out of school don have enough training for social skills They don know how to work with each other And so that why I think it really important to work with each other And one of the things Google focuses on is teamwork and working with other people on the team. And some of the most amazing ideas have come out of teamwork. But you have to practice, you know, as a child. You learn these skills as a child. And that's why I think it's really important for them to work together in teams. I was actually going to build on Esther's comment. So right now with the rise of AI, we clearly have an increase in the need for all of us to be actually increasingly human. So human skills are on the rise. CERTAINLY THE CONCEPT OF COLLABORATION, WHAT I CALL RELATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, IS ON THE RISE, AS OUR ECONOMIES WILL BE INCREASINGLY ALREADY A DEMANDING COMMUNICATION, COLLABORATION AS TOP SKILLS. THE SECOND ELEMENT IS ADAPTABILITY, WHICH GETS A LITTLE BIT TO WHAT BEN DESCRIBED, BUT I THINK I [24:59] Adaptability is actually very, very closely tied with creativity, which is a skill that many of you entrepreneurs have in this room. But this concept of being adaptive is one that we'll see more and more. And then there is a third one, which we touched on already on throughout all these comments, which is learning how to learn. I mean, this capacity, this metacognition that we humans hold will continue being increasingly important. So the question is then how do we teach more of those skills? But those three, I think, will continue rising. So can I just say that most companies that fail, most startups, so 90% of them fail. And you know the main reason they fail? Lack of communication skills. Lack of people being able to get along. So if they fail for that reason, why aren't we teaching those skills? Why are universities not allowing kids to have more interaction and social skills? So I also recommend that everybody read John Doerr book Do you know who John Doerr is Yeah So because I think it important to learn how to empower the people you work with You know, the leader is really important and that person needs to learn how to empower the people that they are working with. And that is involved in social-emotional training. I totally agree with all the skills and competencies and capabilities you three just mentioned. And I think to help our learners to develop all those capabilities and competencies, we need to give them guidance, advice, support, and also inspirations. And we all know those are the things that our great teachers are always good at providing. But talking about teachers, we also heard something from the video clip saying some classrooms have no teachers at all. So actually, I've heard more and more concerns these days about whether in the future, AI will completely, eventually replace all the teachers in the classrooms. So I'd like to hear what's your take on this. Maybe I can start from Esther as you have been a teacher for many many years I think the role of the teacher is really important and I don think that technology can take over the role of the teacher You need a human being there. So I do think that a lot of additional skills can be learned, but I think the teacher needs to be there and support the students and help them understand what they're doing, even if it's just a small percentage of the time. Maybe the teacher could be called a coach. That's what some of the people are saying. My classes were very, very large. They were 70 kids in one class. And the reason that they were that big is the kids worked in teams. Every group, there were teams of four and five in every group. And so it was easy for me to call role because, you know, you just call team one, team two, and so forth. But they also learned a lot about how to get along with each other. And I'll tell you, when they're in the ninth grade, they don't know how. By the time they're in the twelfth grade, if they've been doing this long enough, they know how. Isabel? Yeah I mean our brains are deeply deeply social We are wired to connect as a human species So we need human relationships around us including teachers and other people peers other people surrounding us for all of us to learn and to thrive. Actually, isolation is connected to major mental health issues, which we are already seeing. So anyway, relationships matter tremendously for learning and thriving. And I also believe very similar to my friend Esther, but teachers are here to stay. We need teachers. We need to equip teachers with the right AI tools so that AI can actually support teachers in being increasingly more relational by maybe helping on some admin tasks and things that can free up time. But teachers are here to stay because our brains are deeply, deeply social as humans. The role of teachers may evolve as the way that we are transferring knowledge may evolve with some of these technologies. [29:59] But the idea of one tutor, one AI tutor, one child without any human relationships, I don't see that vision myself, because that would be a world where I don't want to live in. I don't want to have my children live in this world where they are not connected with other humans, where they are not flourishing. So I think that teachers will remain and AI will hopefully make actually teaching one of the best professions it has ever been. I'll give you a mathematical or statistical response to that question. Teachers, like any population, are distributed around a normal curve. the only problem is that the midpoint of the normal curve of teaching is ineffective and that's a fact the fact of the matter is is that anybody here can think about a class you took in college assuming it wasn't last semester and if a final exam were to be produced this instant and I would time you on passing that exam you would all flunk because you didn't learn it and that is true of high school that is true of middle school it's not true of elementary school you do wind up learning to read, write do basic math but the problem with a normal distribution where your midpoint is ineffective is you've got to get a standard deviation away from the mean in order to get to good teaching and that means that one standard deviation from the mean in one direction and above is roughly 16-17% 16, 17% of teachers are good or supremely good, extraordinary. Problem is more than 80 are ineffective or much worse So long as that is the case AI will replace teachers And if we reform the system to actually allow teachers to have that midpoint become effective, where more than 80% are effective to great and less than 20% are bad to terrible, then there will be a role for teachers in the future. I can't agree more on what Ben just shared with us. My personal view, I think AI won't completely replace all the teachers, especially those good teachers, and AI will empower them to make them even better. But AI, like teachers, they do not know about AI, or they do not know how to use technologies. They will be replaced by teachers who do. Okay, actually, our time is off. I think AI and education is such a big topic, we can finish the conversation within 30-40 minutes. And I hope our panel has given you guys some new perspectives and also some advice to carry forward. And thank you so much for your insights and perspectives and also wisdom. And I hope you guys enjoy the rest of the event. Thank you. Well, that's what we will be in the 2021 year of the education panel panel. Because the panel panel is very short, only 30 minutes. Many of the audience also has been saying that they will be able to listen to the guests and discuss what the next generation of education and the students and the kids how to deal with AI. Let's show you how this series will be in the 2016 year's series. We are already in the framework of the review and review. Please don't forget to check our account. Don't forget to click the link. I'm the Google Play 101 of the and I'm the Thank you for your support and support. We'll see you next week. Bye!