I think the distinction here is between "cost to provide education" and "direct costs to students." You can, through government subsidy, have an expensive-to-pr

I think the distinction here is between "cost to provide education" and "direct costs to students." You can, through government subsidy, have an expensive-to-provide education delivered at a low cost to students. Most public universities around the globe that are cheap to students are cheap because of these subsidies. Udacity, if you believe is providing a comparable good, is going the cheap-to-provide route. Admirable if it works, because we can educate the masses without spending a lot as a society. As someone who has spent a fair amount of time in academia (masters, first half of phd), I see areas where Udacity is a good substitute, and areas where it is not. If you're an undergrad sitting in the back row of a lecture hall, why not Udacity? If you're a grad student doing research, obviously not. If you're a grad student doing advanced coursework... maybe?