 Obviously, over the last 30 years, computers have changed in very fundamental ways, but input hasn't. And because of that, every other device, every other type of science, every other type of research is being held back. And second, I'll talk about that, but first I want to show you the power of direct physical interaction and what someone like Martin can do instantly and the power that exists in someone's hands. And you can see that basically the full hand is being tracked, which is something that it's reasonable to assume that if you can look at a hand with a camera that it should be easier to track, but as many of you know, this is one of the hardest problems in computer science, and we've been working on this for probably seven or eight years, and at the end of the day, people expect perfection when you talk about actual hand interface and interaction, and perfection is what's necessary since the power of the hands is about this instantaneous interaction. And in the same way that in real life, there are thousands of correct ways to grab something or touch something, and there should also be thousands of right ways to grab or touch something in the virtual world as well, or with computers as well. He's showing off. And what he did by turning his hand to the left was bring up a menu that, as you can see, there are buttons displayed there, and when he touches the buttons, they react just as a physical button would. And obviously, we think right now, one of the things that has been missing from this next generation of computing are these direct physical skeuomorphic interfaces. And as a result of that, bringing things that anyone, even if they've never used a computer, can instantly access, that's the goal. Awesome. Thanks, Martin. So because of that, it does seem likely to think of the future as in reach. And certainly, there is a dilemma that we take for granted because it's easy to sort of look at the flash of iPhones and, you know, of tablets and the progress that we've made in terms of making computers smaller and faster and more powerful. But at the same time, if you actually think about how input has progressed, it's very, very, very, very shallow. And, you know, an example is to think about how if you go back to the 70s and compare the progress between then to now, on one hand, today we have smart thermostats that are probably as powerful as this whole arena full of super computers. But at the same time, the ways that we interact with computers and technology haven't really changed. And your input has gone from a binary punch card that you punch or dope punch to a keyboard you push or dope push, a mouse you click or dope click, and even that fancy iPhone that has so much promise and does give you the ability to access all the world's information. But it still is, from an input perspective, still virtually binary. And the level of information people communicate to it is very small. And the way that a lot of people try to deal with this is by adding complexity. You add keyboard shortcuts and drop-down menus and things that actually, you know, make software harder to use. And so many things that we are able to do as people with our physical hands, even as children, like mold a piece of clay, become lost permanently for the rest of our lives later on. But those things should be easier with technology and not harder. And there is a fundamental sort of a lack of democracy to these things that have so much power being accessible only to a very small part of a portion of people and even for those people who are experts, they themselves are really stunted by this input paradigm. So then if you look at the hand, it becomes clear that there is an opportunity to use the fact that our hands are this incredibly complicated magical device that every single person in the world can reach out and instantly touch things. And if I grab this imaginary cup here, I can grab it 100% of the time and I grab it correctly all the time. And that isn't just true of me. It's true of almost every single person on the planet. And that's very special. And it's rare that technology brings forward the opportunities to combine these two types of things where we're watching right in front of our eyes massive platforms, our eyes that are three dimensional themselves, like virtual reality and augmented reality. And at the same time, we're seeing an opportunity to bring physical input that will make these things that so far have not been accessible to everyone, have not had a sort of iPhone like moment to bring that to bear. And it's a very unique moment in time. But it requires a very specific sort of thought process about your action. And we, and a lot of people think about this space in terms of things like Minority Airport, where actors and TV shows or on movies will always wave their hands around frantically. And that looks cool, but it's not a good interface. And similarly, a lot of people have ideas about gestures and things that come from science fiction or movies or earlier technologies. But again, a gesture is like sign language. And sign language is also binary and also not a good input. So if I hold up two fingers to close a window, that's also not any different than if I push X to close the window. And none of that lets me grab a ball just so as you can see the image doing and move it and throw it. And all of the thousands of permutations of how we interact with things is being brought to bear. All of that requires a sort of different type of interaction, which we think of as motion control, which is about bringing physical hands and their three dimensionality into three dimensional platforms like virtual reality and augmented reality for the first time. And doing so in a way where they're embedded. And doing that in a way that will allow the OEMs that are creating these platforms to transcend the current boundaries of these input mechanisms. So obviously, virtual and augmented reality are platforms that everyone is talking about. And certainly, it seems like a huge percentage of the companies at Slush are working on things related to these fields. But I think that as we've seen with VR and could see with AIR as well, if input isn't handled right, is a massive failure to live up to expectations. Because even though there was incredible progress made over the last years with the hardware and optics and consumer sentiment, and even making regular people interested in wearing something that has been ruthlessly nerdy for decades, these companies succeeded in making regular people want to wear a giant headset, which is a very, very big deal. But then at the last moment, I think that the space failed in terms of input. And it's easy when you're under pressure to try to go with something that already exists. But I think as we saw with, you say, decades of smartphones, ultimately, with new technology, like smartphones or touch screens, you also need new input, like the capacitor touch screen. So I think what's exciting now is seeing all of these things come together. And certainly, we think that virtual reality isn't a place where the cardinal experience that we are promised, where every single person's dream is to wear a VR headset and feel immediately like you're taken to a different world. You want to feel like you are on the surface of Mars, or you're in your doctor, in your patient's body, you're in your favorite video game world, you're on the surface of Mars as a child. But that's not really possible if you are just looking at it in a passive way. And it's not possible if the controller actually gets in the way. If you are focusing more on learning how to use the controller, or even if you know how to use it, the controller is fundamentally two-dimensional. It's fundamentally, at best, kind of like using a claw game. And that's not what we want the next generation of technology to be. And then particularly, as you sort of look out at the future of these devices, it becomes clear that we see a trend towards, there's a pretty clear cycle where we are moving from wired VR and then mobile VR and then AR. And this cycle itself also means that we as an industry have to find input modalities that are both very powerful and more powerful than anything that has existed in these categories to date, but also at the same time that don't require outside tracking devices and are inexpensive and can be ubiquitous, but also are just always portable. And that's a very big challenge. And when all of those technical challenges and environmental challenges get combined with the fact that the tracking starts to be incredibly good, and you also have to, if you want to target the mobile user who is the promise perhaps of VR to hit that exponential multi-million user scale, if you want to hit them, you have to have the sort of scuorphism and instantaneous interaction and understandability that, say, the iPhone brought to the field. And with that, you have to think seriously about input. And I think it's very easy to think of devices as cool and think if it's cool that that's good enough. But I think we've seen through a painful sort of hype cycle that thinking of a device as cool is not sufficient. But there are certainly positive things. And certainly the fact that so much money and excitement and energy and attention has already been spent on VR. And now, in a lot of ways, VR itself is commoditized since any competent manufacturer can build a VR headset in Asia or otherwise. So the hardware probably already exists. So I think that's set us up for a world where we're seeing very rapid cycling of innovation from an input perspective and a content perspective. And I think we will see a lot of companies move towards that faster iteration cycle maximizes the opportunities for someone to hit that jackpot and to hit that iPhone moment for the space, which is the moment where a regular person can put it on and in probably truly milliseconds understand what the device does, not be afraid of it, have some fundamental understanding in the same way that when someone took out an iPhone and looked at the first applications, they didn't hopefully necessarily think that the calculator application would be the best application that had ever existed for that platform. But there was this sense of permanent change and inspiration and magic, but also of safety. And I think that with a platform that is so fundamentally futuristic and so fundamentally already from a public perception perspective, so out there, you have to do everything possible, whether it is being thoughtful about scumorphism and interfaces and making the interfaces physical and targeting natural interaction and being biased towards those things, even though they come to cost, certainly, hands are not necessarily a natural interaction. It's not the best for everything, certainly. But I think that if you don't start with the most conservative use case that reaches the most mass people, then you don't actually end up with a niche product. I think you often end up with a product that just doesn't exist at all, because you need more than the few hundred thousand people who are loyally using the first generation VR headsets today. And these are obviously platforms that everyone wants to exist very badly. But then, of course, there is the augmented reality that everyone is very excited about. And if you think about the billions of dollars that are being spent by almost every major company in the world on creating a magical, transparent display that people can wear like a pair of glasses on their eyes and look through it and see a physically indistinguishable thing as in front of them, that as you reach out and touch it, will instantly change, that's obviously kind of the holy grail. And I think that probably no one would argue that if that is possible technologically. And I think it certainly is given, and I think not only is it, but the likelihood of it happening has increased massively, given, again, hundreds of millions of dollars of investment plowing into companies like Magic Leap, which has itself started a massive amount of spending by companies with deep expertise in optics and other things in a space that would have been viewed as sort of very, very, very far-fetched or futuristic and would have been only approached with sort of four-year, 50-year timeline projects, perhaps. A lot of companies are now investigating components on a one, two, three-year time scale. And obviously, if you have that ability to display anything in actual reality and use your own hands that are attracted to actual reality, that not only gets sort of more or less every other type of consumer electronics because we don't need a TV, we don't need a phone, it has profound changes for everything almost. We probably sort of are very definition of our existence as people, how we interact with each other in commerce, like the concept of nation-states don't really mean anything if you can instantly feel like you are in a photorealistic replication of Sub-Saharan Africa and your children are growing up seeing people in that environment and they actually feel like they're there. They have the benefit of having traveled the world every moment of their life. So the promise here is massive, but obviously input is one part of the picture, but there's a lot of work that has to happen and there's a lot of risk and all of these things have to come together in a way where hardware companies have to create hardware that is acceptable to consumers and they have to solve, in the case of AR, difficult technical problems, in the case of VR, less about the hardware, but more complexity in terms of how things like hands as a new input and things like the operating system, things like how developers build applications, all of these things have to be fundamentally reconsidered and this creates a very interesting opportunity, probably one of the most exciting times in technology where all of these platforms are converging and we're watching right in front of our faces how the future of not just consumer devices but also industrial users, everything from education and how we use our hands and fingers to interact with the world, to how we control robots on the other side of an airplane field as mechanics working on a jet engine. So it's a very interesting time and I think that we're seeing right now one of the biggest transformations of these industries and we're watching huge things that have been active for decades because VR and AR are not new, but they are multi-decade forces and again, ideas like tracking hands are not new. Certainly we didn't come up with the idea, it's existed for a very long time. So thanks to science fiction and imaginations and people dreaming, probably since the origin of man, all of these things have existed as concepts but we're reaching a point where the technology can implement them all and it's up to us as user thinkers and product thinkers to bring them together in a way that makes it actually, fundamentally, instantly accessible because we probably only have a few chances to try to tap into mainstream users before they give up and move on and if that happens, I think we'll see these spaces that we all want the world to have that can do so much good for so many people. I think we'll see them be permanently delayed or at least delayed for decades. So yeah, thanks very much.