Beginners who are new to programming often vaguely understand other lectures because the explanations are vague, but at some point, they seem to understand the general idea, but they have to move on without fully understanding because they feel vague and uneasy. This lecture is completely different. It uses visual image animations to help you understand the operating principles clearly. It also imprints them visually, so they are imprinted more easily in your head. Other lectures also use visual images appropriately, but this lecture makes the visualizations uniquely outstanding. It is a fundamentally different visualization. It is not just a few visualization images, but a visualization of the process itself. To what extent is this? When interpreting code, the process is visualized in your head. Whether this works or not makes a huge difference. This is a result that I have not experienced in other introductory lectures before. This is probably because they kept the importance of this part in mind when planning this lecture. Otherwise, they wouldn't have spent time and effort implementing detailed animations that are overwhelmingly different from other lectures. Also, it's a meticulous and excellent lecture that is designed so that even if you read the lecture once, you can naturally understand and imprint the key parts by repeating them multiple times. It feels like they designed it meticulously, even considering that beginners don't review properly. The effect is actually amazing. Honestly, most of the other lectures that are said to be for beginners stopped after the middle part. The reason is that in the beginning, it's too easy to understand everything, but from the middle part, there are parts that I don't understand little by little, so I understand the general idea, but the vague understanding piles up and accumulates. Then, in the end, these things become a dagger, and from the latter part, I just follow along and copy the code without understanding what's being said. Even the instructors are mostly just like this in the latter half... For example, when explaining variable declarations in the beginning, the instructor explains them thoroughly as if they were beginners, but when explaining functions, which are new concepts, in the middle, they skip over the structure of functions and other things... No, functions are definitely new concepts, so they are important content that requires a solid understanding, but it's not like the explanation they gave to beginners in the beginning of the lecture. Students are still beginners until they finish the course, and the instructor may think that they will understand even if they don't explain things in detail, but in reality, beginners find the beginning of the course more difficult than the middle and latter half. However, as the lecture progresses, the instructor seems to want to wrap up the lecture quickly, and the lecture content becomes increasingly indifferent and far from being thorough... This is the pattern of most beginners' lectures. Eventually, you reach a point where you get confused about why this is this and why that is that, and you start to give up at that point. For this reason, there are 3~4 lectures that I skipped in the beginning or middle. I think it's because if they're not a good top-class instructor, it's hard to get a sense of how confusing many concepts or techniques that I take for granted are for beginners and how much detailed explanation is needed. It's completely different from what you're good at and how you teach others to do well, so I think most ordinary instructors miss these parts here and there without realizing it even when they give lectures for beginners. But what's scary is that, here and there, those gaping holes in your understanding will come back to you like a dagger later on, and you'll end up giving up. In the end, those lectures weren't really for beginners. This is the first time I've seen a detailed lecture where beginners can really solidify the concepts. Strangely enough, even beginners are still progressing while completely understanding the lecture without feeling uneasy because they're vaguely understanding it. It is qualitatively very, very different from the so-called beginner-level lectures I have taken before. Students who have taken other beginner-level lectures and are listening to this lecture will feel to their bones how overwhelmingly excellent this lecture is and how fundamentally different it is, and students who are taking this lecture for the first time will be proud, thinking that they have excellent abilities and understand the lecture content well. Haha I only write reviews once or twice a year, but this is enough for me. I am grateful. I just hope that this person will continue to upload more good lectures.