The Network State - Balaji SrinIvasan

Guess you're going to maximize that. All right, great. Okay. Yeah. So what I'm going to talk about today, who here has seen the talk that I gave in 2013 at Y Combinator on Exit? Yeah. Okay, great. Okay, so some of you are familiar with that. In some sense. This is sort of like a spiritual sequel, but also a standalone. So I want to talk about something like a conceptual framework that I use to sort of organize how I'm thinking about the future, which I call the network state. And the basic idea is just like every company is becoming a software company, every country will eventually be forced to become a software country. And I'll dive into what this means and also how you might be able to personally benefit from it. So that's me putting me in a suit, basically. One thing I'll say is just go to 21Co, sign up for stuff. We may have some interesting stuff if you guys are interested in this talk. So 21 co. Okay, so for today's talk, basically we're going to basically talk about four things. So you start your own company, you start your own community, like a social network, start your own currency, start your own country. And right now we are here, right? That's basically where we are on that roadmap with digital currencies now at like 100 something billion, 130. Bitcoin might be at 4,000 by the time I get off the stage. And that's pretty awesome. That completely didn't exist even, you know, like seven, eight years ago. And where we're going from that is the next step will be starting your own country. That's where we're eventually going to go. And how do we actually get there? And that's basically this concept of the network state. So just to motivate the idea a little bit, basically what we used to have and what we still have are nation states where essentially you have a geographical area, for example, Russia. And geography is primary and the ideology is secondary. That same geography could be communist, it could be nationalist, like it is now. But basically you swap the flags, you swap the ideology. The geography remains constant, but what we're moving towards is something where the ideology, the beliefs remain constant and the location changes. So those are the two meetup spots for devcon, for Ethereum. So last year was in Shanghai and this year is in Cancun. Same people, different place, same beliefs. Okay. As opposed to same people, same place, different beliefs, which is where the nation state was. And the thinking here is that a lot of folks here are interested in stuff like Seasteads and, and Mars colonies and what have you and startup cities. But there's actually an achievable possible, what people call the adjacent possible that's feasible even now. And what that is is something I call crowd choice. It's basically collective bargaining with governments. So now it's already something that's being done in small scale with the Free State Project where a bunch of libertarians moved to New Hampshire. It's something which Elon Musk has done when he's negotiating with Nevada. And it's something where the tools for finding good locations are, as I'll get into, have become much, much better. So you can actually comparison shop for the ideal jurisdiction. And the idea here is that before you can even think of moving 10,000 people to a seastead, you need to just be able to move 10,000 people to a country. And that itself is actually a very non trivial thing to do. To coordinate 10,000 people moving and just proving that out with today's technology and negotiating a bargain with the governments on their side doesn't require anything new from a tech standpoint, but what it just does require is some customer acquisition and business model building. And once you can do that, sort of like working out a muscle, if you can then push a button and get 10,000 people to arrive in a location, you can start changing the location to more and more ambitious places like a charter city, and then eventually to something like a seastead or a Mars colony. But first, being able to coordinate and move thousands of people in a reliable way, that is still an unsolved problem in terms of doing it in a predictable and reproducible way. And so I'll talk about how we can get there, but first let me kind of motivate, you know, what are the technological drivers that are leading to this concept? Network stake. And what do I mean by it in more detail? After I talk about that, I'll talk about this concept of crowd choice and then also what you can do. So the technological drivers. So essentially there's this great book, I love this book, Tweet about it or when I used to tweet. And you should get this. There's a bunch of other references I posted on my blog, but this is a book called Sovereign Individual and it goes through essentially the history of violence and how back when we were hunter gatherers, it didn't really make sense to go and mug somebody because they had no stored property. They were just hunting and gathering and they just walked around and their possessions were just the clothes on their back and they didn't have granaries or stored food or what have you. And then with the rise of agriculture and then armor and then gunpowder, the balance of power with violence shifted. And what's really interesting is people often talk about how culture is upstream of politics, but technology is upstream of culture because technology determines what is feasible. And all the political ideologies that are floating around are implicitly enabled by the technologies that existed at that time. And so if you take a technology first vantage point, a lot of things become more clear. And in particular, basically the logic of violence is changing. That's to say, it's becoming harder and harder to steal property. Even if you have a million people, you can't break cryptographic code. You can't steal somebody's bitcoin. It's not actually that easy. So as the logic of violence changes, that's going to change the structure of society. And lots of the things that we sort of take for granted as the ultimate authorities that we appeal to are no longer those authorities. And so just to give you some sense of these things, these technological drivers, I'll just do a quick skim through recent headlines. So you, you know, bitcoin has basically blown up the idea of capital controls, right? In order to do capital controls, you need to be able to do packet filtering. A normal nation state can't do that. You need to have a very software intelligent nation state. You know, if you talk about 3D printing, that's something which challenges the ability of the state to regulate. That is to say, you know, regulation now becomes DRM. Unless you can impose DRM, you can't stop people from 3D printing. Robot hands or drones or guns or any other kind of physical object. Now basically DRM becomes the locus of regulation. Third example. So quantified self versus licensing. So there's a lot of technologies that are really have been held back, but that will eventually get out there in wide distribution that allow you to basically measure your own blood glucose and hematocrit and so on in a mobile way, just using your phone as the computer where the measurements feed into. And once that happens, you can put software on the phone to diagnose yourself. So in this fashion, sort of you or really the software becomes your own doctor. And the intelligence of 1,000 doctors is basically put on the server to interpret your information in real time locally. So it's not like you're doing without a doctor, but it's really the software license is what gives you access to those medical licenses. Another example, so over here we have telepresence versus borders. And so now your ability to intradite people coming into your country is a function of your ability to find and intradite a network connection. Edward Snowden, stuck in Russia, but he's not really stuck. He can go in a little robot like this. And these robots currently are only so. So they're getting better and eventually they're going to become like full humanoid kind of things that you can just control at the speed of light. And so now in order to enforce your border controls, you're going to need a pretty good fireball. Here's another example. So police testimony. So now GoPros body cams are mandatory in several states. And that's a really interesting thing. Video. The network is trusted over the sworn testimony of an officer of the state. So we're trusting the computer, the network, more than we are trusting the state. Here's another example. So when you talk about search warrants, encryption is something which is defeating search warrants. In order to be able to search, you need to be able to decrypt. So again, you're going to need software savvy. Few more quick examples. So social networks versus the jury of peers. Facebook and Twitter timestamps are now routinely cited as exculpatory evidence or conversely incriminatory evidence in a trial. It's not just the opinions of your fellows, it is the opinions of the people in your social network and the folks who have seen or screenshotted something. In terms of bureaucracy, technology is basically becoming necessary to run a bureaucracy. The healthcare.gov debacle was only fixed by six engineers going and fixing that. Again, to run a state, you need engineers. I'll give one last example here, which is basically that cyber attacks versus conventional warfare. The Navy's latest warships run on Linux and cyber attacks actually completely change the balance of power because one individual can do as much damage as a nation state. It's a completely different deterrence doctrine versus nuclear weapons. And it equalizes and changes things in a way that we haven't fully computed out. So you take all these things together and you see something very important happening. You take these pieces together and you see that the leviathan is shifting, okay? And so by that, what I mean is we are getting a new entity that stands over us. That is to say, what is the most powerful force? And if you go back in time, that most powerful force for many, many centuries was for many people, God. Without getting into religion, it was just something that was the organizing princip of society. People really, really respected the church. They really believed in hell and so on. And that was actually like a governing law. And then by the 20th century, so when people really believe in God, the Ten Commandments and so on were enough. Why didn't you steal? Because God was going to punish you. By the late 1800s, early 1900s, Nietzsche wrote, God is dead. And by that, he wasn't actually attacking it. He was just saying, hey, look, educated people don't believe anymore. We. We need some new force to be able to restrain people, if such exists. And that actually turned out to be the state. So the 20th century was the rise of these gigantic super states like communist China and Russia and the Soviet Union and the United States. And they weren't all bad. The United States wasn't terribly bad. And it wasn't like a pure state entity. There was fusion. So the United States was for God and country. That's the Marine Corps. Whereas the Soviet Union wasn't really too hot on God. It was just pure state. And now we're entering kind of a new era where the most powerful force is not the church, it's not the US Military, it's encryption. And the reason you steal is not because God will smite you or because the state will punish you. It's because the network won't let you. You don't have the private keys. It's literally impermissible mathematically. And it's a complete gigantic shift in what that Leviathan is, what the most powerful actor is. The previous seven or eight slides gave you some ideas of how that plays out in practice. But talking about the jury of peers or capital controls or what have you, things that people previously looked at the state to accomplish, they now need to actually have mastery over the network to accomplish those same things. And so the thing about this is this was anticipated by many writers. These thoughts are assembly. They're not fully original synthesis. But for example here, Assange wrote that basically, strong cryptography can resist an unlimited application of violence, and no amount of violence can solve a math problem. And that's really very different. That's not something that the 20th century really had to think about, and that's not something that the police or the military had to think about. Eminent domain hasn't had to think about that many different things. The assumption is, okay, I'm going to enforce a law eventually by having a guy with a gun, but that may no longer be possible. And so the idea here is that first, encryption protects property rights. This won't be novel to most of you. You understand this from Bitcoin, of course, but it extends beyond Bitcoin and it extends beyond smart contracts to basically any form of object that you can even conceptualize digitally, whether it's a car, whether it's a house, if you've got a smart lock on the house, all these kinds of things are eventually all going to become digital. So the sum total of your property rights, you'll probably be able to hold locally on your phone, and you'll be able to walk around the world and just hit buttons and open things. And if you lose those private keys, you lose this, then you lose access encryption also, and this is a little bit less obvious, it protects freedom of association. So you can just go in a series. You go from just two way communication between two people to K way organization, then K way software development, hardware development, K way development of 3D printed items, and so on. And then you can actually go and take a few people or a lot of people collaborating in an encrypted fashion in the cloud, and have them actually materialize things offline. And so you put all these things together and you get something that I think of as the rise of the network state. So it starts with encryption, it starts with things like the spread of social networks. And over the next 5, 10 years, as VR deploys, as digital currency deploys, you're going to have virtual worlds with virtual currencies virtually, where people can experiment with different kinds of systems. They can experiment with their Paris Commune, they can experiment with their Gulch Gulch. And because it's encrypted, it's invite only. And really nobody can stop them. And you can have every at least three of the five senses. You can have sight, you can have sound, and you can have touch with haptics. You won't have smell or taste. But unless you're Goldscholch's perfume company, that won't be too big a deal. And what will happen, in my view, is kind of what's already happening, which is that these virtual organizations, these virtual realities with virtual currency, these social networks, will eventually want to meet up in person, which is basically what this room is. It's a bunch of folks who came from common interest, organized via the Internet and assembled in place. And that's because there's certain kinds of human things that are just still best done in person. And what that does is it starts to fundamentally change the entire logic of the Leviathan and how we, how we enforce laws, how we change laws. Because rather than voting every four years to change the law under which you live, you can just move to change the law under which you live and be with like people. So it's no longer a four year election cycle. It's basically, okay, how easily can I move with 500 other people to this location? How flexible am I? How much can I exit? And I'll put some of these pieces together at the very end to give some ideas about what you can potentially personally do to benefit from this. Okay, so when we talk about the rise of network state, here's I think a really good parallel, right, so on the left, Marc Anderson, my partner at Anderson Horowitz, wrote this article titled Software Zing the World several years ago. And at the time it was maybe like, at least to me it was obvious to many people they would argue with it. But now it's completely obvious to everybody that every company has to be a software company. You can Google that. You'll see 500 articles with almost the exact same title. Whether it's something Adela or the Harvard Business Review. Everybody basically agrees that if you are not, if you don't have a software savvy CEO, you're probably going to lose customers to other people. That's not a guarantee of success, of course, but without knowing software, you're probably going to lose customers. And what's starting to happen is unless you're a software savvy country leader, you're going to lose citizens. And so there's three countries I've just picked out over here. So mit, like Brad Graduate, like Netanyahu of Israel, is an MIT graduate, he's an engineer, he knows what he's doing. In Estonia, their president Tomas Ilves was also a software engineer. And so is the Prime Minister of Singapore, Lee Hsien Loong. He's actually taught this class at Cambridge and even posted a two's compliment problem on his Facebook where he challenged Singaporeans to go and solve it. Actually knows binary arithmetic. So pretty smart guys. These guys are all people who understand what engineering is, understand what software is and who are well positioned. These kinds of small countries run by software savvy leaders are well positioned for this entry now. So this is basically the fundamental driver over here is that just like a company that's not software savvy will lose its customers, a country that's not software savvy will eventually lose its citizens. So the fundamental driver I believe is going to be migration. That basically migration will discipline states, especially migration of the most talented people. And you might say, well, not everyone's going to move, but only 3 or 4% of the world lives in the United States. Only A tiny percentage of people actually ended up moving here and that definitely did change the world. Only a tiny percentage of people went and founded Google or founded Uber or founded Facebook and that changed the world. So a small number of very highly motivated, intelligent people who publicly move in a big way can make a very big difference. In fact, in some locales, the top thousand people are like 30, 40, 50% of the tax base. So the question is, what would they do exactly? How would they migrate? How would this work? So there's sort of a one liner that I think about a lot, which is that mobile is making us more mobile. And I won't go through every single one of these technologies right now. I'll probably post a revised version of these slides on my blog. But the basic idea is that pretty much every technology you look at, for example from social networks to ride sharing to room sharing, anything from Kindle, et cetera, is, is basically reducing obligate ties to the land. That's to say, yes, you can stick around in one place, but you don't have to. Your huge shelf of books just got put into your phone. Your friends don't even know that you moved because you're connected to them in the social network. And you could literally move from California to Boston. And unless you announce it, nobody in your social network is going to even know. So that's a really interesting thing. All these technologies reduce the cost of moving and they're making moving in both the social sense and the financial sense of less expensive. There's many different technologies that you can go through and enumerate here, but the net of it is if moving is becoming cheaper socially and it's becoming cheaper financially. And we also observe that law is a function of latitude and longitude. The more mobile we are, the more cheaply we can change our law. Just to underscore the concept that law is a function of latitude and longitude, here are maps of property tax, sales tax, income tax, gas tax, just in the United States. And as you can see, they vary quite a bit. In fact, if you superimpose them, given two different lifestyles, you might have a completely different optimal state in which to live. If you drive a lot and don't have a house and make a lot of money versus don't drive a lot and rent and don't make much money, you're probably going to have two different states in which to live. All else being equal, most people aren't even aware of what their ideal place to live is. You're going to need software to figure out These incentives. Imagine overlaying 50 of these maps, let alone four, and you start to get a sense of how complex it is. This is just tax. Forget about gun laws and this law and that law. But in theory, and certainly, as I'll show in practice, you can take a bunch of the most important kinds of laws, stack them together, and start deriving optimum move functions and also cost estimates of how costly it would be for you to move, how costly would it be for you to change the law under which you live. And that's really what's the whole point of an election. It is to change the law under which you live. Except now we have an alternative, which is migration. Another way to change the law under which you live, just change your X and Y rather than try to change it in place. And of course, while I've shown this domestically, this also certainly applies internationally. Here's a map of Bitcoin regulations. You can come up with very similar maps for many other kinds of policies. So if Bitcoin, if mobile is making us more mobile, and if law is a function of latitude and longitude, and it's also increasingly possible to assemble very large groups of people online. So I love this tweet. This is a tweet that just shows that the largest country in the world is Facebook. Ha. And then there's little old China and number two in India. And Twitter has a user base that's almost as large as the United States. So it's like gigantic. Absolutely gigantic. And a while back, for example, Mark Zuckerberg had a Skype with David Cameron, who was the Prime Minister of this very small social network with only 60 million users called the United Kingdom. And that's like, way down the list over there. So the scale of these things, people see numbers, but really, when we have VR, you're going to see football stadiums of football stadiums of football stadiums of people. And get a true sense of what the scale of these social networks is, where you don't really fully see that when you see like 1 million Twitter followers or 200,000 upvotes. So mobile's making us more mobile. Law is a function of latitude and longitude. We're getting really good at coordinating large crowds of people online. And so all of these are basically prerequisites for this concept of TBAAS sorting. Now, if you do anything in math or anything in computer science, economics, whatever, you'll always be humbled by the fact that somebody figured it all out 50 or 60 years ago. Right? And so this guy, T Bao, he probably also stood on the shoulders of some giant, but had this amazing article in the 50s which basically said, hey, how can we solve the free rider problems? How can we solve various kinds of economic problems? And he couldn't have conceptualized all the stuff that was going to happen over the next 65 years. What's amazing is that the premises that he put down for this concept of TBAO sorting have basically all been enabled by smartphones, phones and the Internet. If you look at those seven premises like perfect information and no spillover of goods because it's a SaaS service that's going directly to you and not to your neighbor and so on, these things are now increasingly either exactly or very close to being satisfied by the current information economy. And so it's really worth going and dusting off this article and all the other articles like it because it's a theory that sat on the shelf for a long time until. Until now. Its idea has come or its time has come. So what exactly is TBAS sorting? So the basic idea, and I'll prepare a better slide on this, but the basic idea is as follows. What if you take 1,000 software engineers who are making, let's say, 100,000 a year, so a total of $100 million annualized income, you take all their preference vectors, they want this tax rate and this marriage law and this gun law and so on, and you aggregate them, then you treat that as a search query across jurisdictions. You find the jurisdictions of the world that best fit the collective preferences of those thousand people, and then you negotiate with the governors or the mayors there and move there if and only if they change that policy. Okay, now there's some precedents for this which I've listed. For example, like the Free State project, which moved about 10, 20,000 people to New Hampshire. And obviously guys like Elan or companies like Boeing will go and negotiate with states. And what is Tesla if not just a assemblage of a few thousand individuals? Right. The difference here is you don't have to be part of a company to go and negotiate with the governor. Instead, you can just form a cloud community which has a single purpose, which is, hey, let's get the best deal for our members with all the governments around the world that want this gigantic new tax base. And what the government will do is they'll say, okay. I mean, if they're smart, if they're software, they'll say, okay, well, you're bringing in $100 million of annual new revenue because you're all these remote workers. You can work from Anywhere. And our current tax rate is, let's say 10%, but you want 9%. Okay, but if we bring you in, we'll actually make more money because even though we're reducing the taxes on our existing citizens, we're gaining this huge new tax base of productive people. So for the first time, it's actually possible to empirically look at what laws and what, you know, regulations and taxes get individuals to move. Not just large corporations, but individuals that group inconvenience into groups and then move. So I think this is going to be a very revolutionary concept. I think that it's time to start productizing something like this. I think it's totally possible. Nothing I'm describing here is not possible. And I'll show some ways that you as an individual can maybe even start working on it yourself. So what you can do right now, I think the single most important thing before people think about having an independent state is to become financially independent yourself. Before you can declare independence, you want to be financially independent. And before you can even move somewhere, the more flexibility you have, the more financial independence you have, the better. I'll present, I think, maybe a novel but easy to apply formula where you can become financially independent even if you're not, you know, like a founder of a successful startup or make it rich on a great investment. And you know, what it used to be like. In 2005, Paul Graham wrote this recipe you get right. So 2005, Paul Graham wrote this thing where he said, hey, the way to get rich is to come to Silicon Valley, found a startup and raise vc. And yeah, that works if you are lucky and motivated and so on and crazy enough to go and do a startup and lucky. But I'd say the new recipe is don't go to Silicon Valley, don't found a startup and don't raise vc. Instead, I would say get a remote work job, do the most anti American thing ever, which is save money. Okay? And then now you've got financial independence, right? And I'll just present some quick calculations to show what I mean by this. So over here is a very simple spreadsheet where you just assume that you're making, say, let's say you've gone and gotten a job at Google, you've gotten a job at Facebook or what have you. You don't do anything political, you just keep your head down, you just earn money and you do not apply for any kind of manager role. After the first year, instead of getting a promotion, you ask to work remote. And the reason is if you're a manager, then you're a hub and you're kind of forced to be on site and so on and manage. People promote. But if you are a really, really good engineer or lawyer or graphic designer or somebody else who can do their work over an Internet connection, they'll be happy to let you work remote once you've shown that you're reliable over the course of three or six months or nine months or a year, because it's hard to find good people, probably almost everybody in this room could do that, could go and get a job at a software company or something along those lines and then start working remote. And now if you then think about, ok, where are you going to live if you go to, for example, a country like Singapore? So in the bottom left, Singapore's tax rates are something like about $10,000 equivalent US if you make 120k in income. And that's actually a very big difference because it compounds over years. If you can get taxed at Singapore rates and if you can go and spend at, let's say, Thailand rates. And this may require expatriation, by the way, but if you can do that, you can save quite a lot of money each year. And the lower your burn rate, the higher your personal run rate. So in the final column in the right hand side, I show at that burn rate and at that income and at that savings rate, how many years of Personal Runway you have. Now, the awesome thing about that is you can get to a few hundred thousand dollars of savings in several years, maybe a decade or more of personal Runway by doing a very straightforward thing that most of the people in this room are capable of doing. It just requires one step, which is moving overseas. Leaving Silicon Valley now I'm kind of stuck because I'm a hub. Don't do that. But if you can move, you should, the younger you are. If I was out of college, I would do this, but didn't have attachments. And the thing about this is there's a lot of tools now that make this really easy. So if you go to, like nomadlist.com you can find places in Thailand, you can find places all over the world that are actually pretty cheap and awesome to live because the rest of the world has gotten much, much nicer over the last 20 years now that they've become capitalist and have free trade and so on. Nomadlist.com is quite good. And I also recommend another company. So this company I actually founded called Teleport recently got acquired and Teleport will let you do comparisons between cities. And so you can see how much less expensive it is to go and post up in sunny Thailand as opposed to San Francisco. And the numbers here are absolutely gigantic. There's pretty much nothing you can do that will be as deterministic in terms of getting to financial independence as moving. Because you're talking about 40 or 50% of your annual income, and you're talking about something where you already have the skills to make that amount of money. You can make it easy to save money by just moving overseas. Now, of course, once you've got this nest egg, you can decide if you so desire to go and invest in cryptocurrency. And that's also pretty awesome, because then it doesn't matter if you say something unpopular on social media, if people downvote you or yell at you or what have you, you're actually financially independent. Right? They have no power over you. If folks yell at you, if you're thinking about things like starved societies or what have you, there will be people who yell at you on social media. The more financially independent you are, the more you can just shrug it off, doesn't matter. And maybe bitcoin will hit 4,000 by the time we're done. So that's it. Just to summarize. So basically, these are the technological driving forces that I think will lead to this thing I call the network state. I think the fundamental driver is migration. The migration of talented individuals will discipline these states and coordinated migration via the concept of crowd choice. I think it's something that you could productize. Now, I think as an individual, simply migrating yourself is a good way to get to financial independence and then you can maybe get help, get to an independent state. Thank you. I want to allow for time for just one question while we set up the next presentation. So if you wanted to take this time, sure. So biology is.

As a bit of a system theorist, you understand the positive feedback loops and the negative feedback loops in any system. When you, back in the day when you were tweeting, you spoke about the two political parties, the ones that are the nationalists, you can call them, and the internationalists, like, we like to fall under the internationalist sphere. And as a tool to achieve our goals, we will have the network and Internet and all the concepts that you described today. But you also spoke about the nationalists and the fact that they have some tools like control of the territory, the fact that they have existing networks. When you apply this to the individual right now, and you think about, should we go outside of Silicon Valley or should we stay in here. Silicon Valley has a lot of amazing networks, a lot of talent and, and a lot of capital. What are your thoughts about balancing these two approaches?

Yeah, good question. So I think that in the ideal scenario, internationalists and nationalists discipline each other, where internationalists do have to live somewhere, so they need to negotiate with a bunch of different countries. And nationalists need to be fairly. They have to tamp down their worst instincts on both ends of the spectrum. They can't be too communist or too racist if they want to attack the best talent in the world, which wants to just live and make money. So hopefully both of them discipline the other. In the context of Silicon Valley, I'd say the whole Token and ICO thing was basically the last thing that was needed, because everything else we've already pushed up into the cloud. We've got slack in the cloud and we've got Google Docs and we've got Gmail and mobile phones and everything else, but with tokens and ICOs. Companies used to be born on Sandhill Road and then they would go and grow up on Wall Street. And the fact that they were funded on Sand Hill road meant that VCs wanted to have driving distance to their board seats. So the companies had their offices set up within driving distance of Sand Hill. And this is basically one of the biggest reasons for the clustering of companies over here, is that VCs don't want to drive too far. I know, it's really prosaic. It's like the width of a railway determined by a horse. So now that you can actually raise money through the cloud, somebody who's in India or in Israel or anywhere no longer needs to come out to Silicon Valley for like two weeks to build a relationship with VC and go and talk to us in the oak tables and so on. And that's kind of artificial. Instead, they can just be meritorious and just do it online. And so that is the big thing that I think will cut the tie and then finally decentralized technology. Well, thank you so much. Thanks.