I think the content that introduces new technologies and proceeds with clone coding is good. However, as time has passed, there have been many errors due to incorrect package versions or changes in usage, so the time spent directly modifying the official documentation has increased significantly more than the time spent watching the lecture. (Lecture 1, Official Document 9 = I'm confused whether I'm watching the lecture or hearing an alarm telling me to go to the official website) It feels more like watching a demonstration of X clone coding than a lecture. I wish they had mainly explained how the package is used, what its advantages are, the life cycle of the nextjs framework, advantages, disadvantages, and recommended file structure design. I felt that the explanation was lacking because they mainly showed coding, so I was sometimes shocked. It would have been nice if you had focused more on the correct methodology, structural design, optimization, etc. through clone coding, but instead, you were told to study more by looking at the official documentation, so you ended up looking at the official documentation a lot and gaining knowledge that wasn't covered in the lecture, which seems good. If you published the lecture for this purpose, it seems like you succeeded, but it's a lecture that leaves a lot of regret because it seems like the purpose of taking the lecture to make it easier to understand has disappeared. In the next lecture, I hope you will provide a lecture centered on examples that are appropriate for the situation, with prepared code, unified naming conventions, and various file structures used in practice. Then, I will use the source code on GitHub to solve errors that aren't covered in the lecture and study them step by step in the official documentation to solve them. I hope this feedback was helpful, even if it was a little, to Zerocho, who always strives to create good lectures.