 Hi Shar. Hello. How are you too? Good. Great. I'm glad to hear it. Brad. I'm not sure we've met, Brad. It's great to have you on the call. Where are you based? Rochester, Michigan. Very nice. I'm in a smart zone. Ah, what does that mean? I'm being incubated. Okay. I'm in a business incubator. Nice. Can probably wait just a bit to get started. Have we heard about w3.org at all? I'm not sure I have. Could you say more? Let me just put it in the chat. Thank you. Thanks for sharing that. Yeah, hopefully it helps. I'm sure. Where are you located? I'm located in Denver, Colorado. Oh, nice. I have a business partner in Wyoming. Oh, nice. Yeah, it's a beautiful part of the country. Yeah. That's where all the water is, where he is. Ah, yeah. We don't have so much of that here in Denver, unfortunately. New York City can be beautiful. Are you right in the city? Yes. Nice. What part? What city are you in? New York City. Oh, you're in New York? Yes. Oh, that's a recent thing, right? No, no, no. I've been living here for 35 years. Oh, I thought one time it was mentioned that you were up early on your time. You and I are in the same time zone. Yeah, up early just means four o'clock, six o'clock, whatever. Which borough do you live in? Are you in Manhattan? Yes, I'm in Harlem, which is upper Manhattan. Very nice. And behind me is a shot from Central Park, which is only about 10 miles from my house. Oh, well, that is good. Hi, Sean, no worries. One second, I'm going to pause the recording and then get a stream. So I am having a problem setting up the live stream. I'm going to let you take it over Shar and then I will upload the video to YouTube after the meeting. Okay, great. Wonderful. We'll go ahead and get started then. Thanks everyone for joining the meeting and it looks like we are recording. Welcome to the Hyperledger Identity Special Interest Group Call for June 29th. Thanks for joining us today. I'm Shar Haaland, a co-chair of this group with Vipin and Tim who are on the call. And today on the agenda we have our regular working group status updates. And then we'll hear about the World Economic Forum paper titled Reimagining Digital ID from Vipin. So really looking forward to that. Are we writing anything with that paper, Vipin? How do you mean? I mean, are we going to be adding content to the paper? No, it's been published June 2023. Are we going to be writing a white paper here? Yeah, we had started a white paper a long time ago. The ecosystem was still developing and it was growing a lot. So at that time we decided to give it the pause. It was kind of spinning out of control. There were so many different ways in which we could have gone. So I think we probably should refocus on that agenda item later on in the year. Yeah, Dan, in the presentation that I'm giving, there will be a link to that particular paper. And Dan, I know your name is on the list of people who contributed to the paper. Dan Backonheimer who's just posted a chat link to the paper. Anyway, I don't want to hold up Char. No worries. Yeah, we've had our groups have recently merged and transitioned to be a special interest group rather than working groups. So we're more focused on the community news and presentation aspect of it. But we could absolutely form a task force to work on a white paper. And I think that would be a really useful thing to do. So but I will continue on with the introductions of the call. This is a Linux Foundation call. So we have the antitrust policy written out here that we are following and then as well the hyperledger code of conduct, which is linked here. If anybody would like to put their name on the attendees list for on the meeting page, that would be wonderful. And now would be a great time if anybody would like to introduce themselves and talk a little bit about something you want to share your interest in in the space. So feel free to grab the mic or raise your hand. Go ahead, Brett. Okay. So my name is Brett Carpenter. And I'm the managing partner operator of Cradco, situated in the city of Rochester, Michigan, on the campuses of Oakland University. My focus is to have autonomous embedded systems. And the first low hanging fruit is identity. One of the things that our group will be focused on is LiDAR and geospatial information and embedding our proprietary intellectual property in that technology. Great. Thank you so much for joining the call. We're glad you're here. Would anybody else like to introduce themselves? Anybody else like to introduce themselves? Yes. Hi, I'm Alfonso Rovela from Hyperledger Latino America, a regional chapter. I've been part of the ID working group for a while, and I'm glad to be back here in this new format. Thank you. Absolutely. Thanks for joining. If anybody else would like to introduce themselves, feel free to jump in. We also have a few announcements, upcoming speakers on this call. Our next call we'll have Stefan Moy talking about EIS 2.0 and the European Wallet Initiative. Next call after that will be on AI and SSI. And the call after that will be on credential migration and for wallets and credential providers. Lots of interesting topics ahead. Vivian, I know you sent this link, call for papers out in our email thread. Did you want to give a brief verbal announcement about that as well? Not really. Everything is there. Okay. Great. Yeah. Link is there. We also have a note about the Hyperledger Aries Framework JavaScript workshop that's happening on July 11th. And here's links to more details and registering another Hyperledger workshop on running Aries in the Browser with Hyperledger and non-creds on July 18th. There's the link as well to join that. So are there any other announcements, introductions, or anything anybody would like to say before we head into the Working Group updates? All right. So we'll start with for the Hyperledger Indie Contributors Working Group. We met last week. Our last call was discussing the Indie Summit, which we just wrapped up 11 minutes ago. This was a three-hour event to get everyone involved in Indie together to talk about how they're using Indie. What is the future of Indie? What do we want to add to it and improve about it? How can we increase those development contributions? So full of very, very interesting discussions and important information exchange. So I have, excuse me, I have a question about that. So in a technical overview, are we talking about Hyperledger Fabric integrating with Indie? That came up briefly on the call today. I think the context in which it was talked about is that Indie compared with Hyperledger Fabric is very much purpose-built for identity. And so with the way that the, among the people on the call today, I think that that is the focus. So but I'll have to. What about BASU? Are we interested in integrating BASU with Hyperledger Fabric? And Ethereum, any of any of those ideas? So I guess the call mainly focused on Indie as the centerpiece. So yeah, it's a good question, though. If anybody else on the call knows anything about that, feel free to jump in. But yeah, not too sure on that right at the moment. Yeah, I mean, this is Sean from Hyperledger. BASU is an Ethereum client. And in regards to BASU interacting with Fabric, I know there are some folks working on that. Probably the best place to go would be the Hyperledger Discord. But as Shah just said, the conversation this morning was specific to Indie. And one of the other options, what does that ecosystem look like? So it was a really great chat. It was recorded. And I believe they're going to post it at some point after the recording includes very good. And the only other thing that I could add is, you know, when Indie was developed, it was it was all basically all in one. And then they spun off of the wallet and agent components into Aries. And the crypto components were spun off separately. And as was said, it was purpose built for identity Indie was. And then, again, Aries was derived to better support identity functions. Now, folks have built identity systems that use Fabric. But yeah, you kind of have to twist and turn to make it work. Anyhow, that's the only thing I want to add. Right. Right. What were you saying? Sorry, Brett, to interrupt. Oh, no, I'm just saying integrating the two together would be very high level. But also interoperability standpoint, we, you know, the initial vision and it still is decentralized identifiers. If you if you decentralized identifiers should work for the user, whether I get a did from an Ethereum network or from a Fabric network or from an Indie network or from checked or somewhere else, those are my dids living in my wallet, I should be able to use them as I see fit. There are some things like there are some competitors to Indie that don't work with like didcom and there are some competitors to Indie that don't do certain things. But overall, the community is working on being as standards compliant as possible. So that whatever flavor you choose to build on, you are not locking that user out of an experience or those verifiable credentials or that did come up. And just as a point of reference, my focus is contracting with the military. So that would have many different regions. And so that complexity is something that I'm focused on. Yeah, so the did spec came out of Department of Homeland Security RFP years ago, 2015 or 2016. And also from a dot gov perspective, if you want to look at what's what the BC dot gov team has been doing with not just BC, but the pan Canadian trust framework folks have been doing. It's pretty impressive. Yes, being self sovereign identity into that dot gov context. Definitely. The Central Bank of Canada is pretty impressive with all of that initiative. Yeah, thanks for thanks for your question on that Brett. Let's see. So in the areas working group, they've been meeting every week. Has anybody been able to attend to attend any of those recent meetings who would like to give a quick report? So it looks like they've been merging in RFC PRs as well talking about marketing, mediators and did peer. So what's going on there? How about areas by fold? Anybody in this group attend that one? See the notes didn't get into too many specifics, but I think they're talking about issues, PRs, general updates and and future planning for the areas college and Python is your group meeting met this week. So talking about the release candidates, the next release candidate for acupuncture release 082, as well embedding a non creds rust into acupy talking about the areas mediator service in DCO just open sourced socket dock, which is a really important piece of that. So that's exciting. Did peer two and three as well. Talking about one of one of the one of the most complicated parts of using acupy is the startup parameters or that that can be a barrier to entry. And so an idea about acupy startup parameters editor. And then as well, merging, merging in PRs for a term of JavaScript. Anybody attend that meeting? So they've been having a lot of discussions about. Relationship to the open wallet foundation did come be to wallet API as well revocation documentation. So lots going on there. Hyperledger Ursa don't expect there to be meetings there anymore with the end of life status. And then in the non creds hyperledger and non creds working group meeting anybody attend that one. So they finalize the release for a non creds 010. Had a report from the non creds workshop mentorship update. And then as well talking about the non creds specification and new revocation approaches. So lots going on in those working groups. Anything else hyperledger related anybody going to bring up? Let's see moving on to the trust of our IP foundation. Don't believe there's been an all members meeting more recently than our last meeting. Same with the communications committee, but feel free to jump in if I'm wrong about that. In the governance stack working group, they've been talking about the TOIP glossary workspace. Sounds like this is a document primarily aimed at helping trust registry and trust spanning protocol specs within the technology stack working group. And then as well the governance framework demand curves are talking about adoption increasing and seeing that digital wallets and very public credentials are starting to make some serious progress in the market. Let's see in the technology stack working group. They've got a bunch of task forces here, the technology architecture, trust registry, trust branding protocol, ACDC AI and metaverse, and then a new one credential exchange protocol task force. So lots going on in each of those. Does anybody have any updates on the working group or any of those specific task forces? I have a statement. I think in regards to metaverse, I think that the model of lidar and geospatial engineering and electromagnetic computation is something that should be more of a paramount than just having and I'm not trying to speak disparagingly against metaverse but well like a cartoon. So that's my contribution of thought is that instead of having a metaverse that having lidar and geospatial in artificial intelligence would probably be more advantageous to corporations and the corporate world. Yeah, thank you for that point. There's link here to their their meeting page and if you want to get into contact with them. I can add a couple bits there. So in the last AI metaverse, we had a guest from a researcher at Berkeley and he was speaking to the ability to derive the primary and the most accurate derivation from hand and head movements that are broadcast is is a unique identity. So his research showed that he could with a high degree of accuracy uniquely identify the person based on hand and head movements in a gallery of 50,000 which is kind of scary because as I learned from the call, you know, the avatars are rendered on the receiving end not on not on, you know, the the user and, you know, so if I'm interacting with six entities on the metaverse, they're getting my basically my raw biometric information. Right, right. And just as a just as a blurt, I'm an IBM partner and we have really strict policy against spatial recognition. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, you said spatial, not facial, right? I'm no facial. Okay, yes, there's no facial recognition involved. Yeah, yeah, no, I get that. I remember that the this is behavioral by me. So ISO defines biometrics as the automated recognition of individuals using biological or behavioral characteristics. Okay, so these are behavioral characteristics. The way I move the gate recognition is behavioral your keystroke dynamics is a behavior. I just I'm thinking that I might get in trouble with IBM. So with that, I'll reach out to them and see what they say. Yeah, yeah, can you provide that link to me because I don't think I can get it from where I'm standing? Yeah, well, I can I'll look for it. But as Char said, the meeting minutes are in the link and within the meeting minutes is the the link to the the the researchers research document. Thank you for that. So that was interesting. Then from that same document with less precision, he was demonstrating that again just through hand gestures and head movements that were broadcasting all over the frickin place in the metaverse, I call it the mega curse. I'm not an adopter. They also also can glean about 2000 other factors like your age, your sex, you know, your ethnicity, you know, now it's less accurate than your identity, uniqueness. But he was able to derive those factors, like with 60 or so percent accuracy according to his study. So I thought that was pretty interesting. Yeah, that is interesting. My treatment is that this is applicable to, you know, to the corporate world in dealing with asset management. And so that that's my focus with with this meeting is to have more of an, you know, an ID for, let's say, IBM Maximo to be able to integrate that into asset management. And I just and I just and I just think that when you have, let's say a lidar or geospatial, you have something concrete, you know that that building is there because of the satellite telemetry, you know, so it's not something that you could, in a court of law, essentially dispute if you're having problems, you know, with asset exchange or transaction. So that's my treatment. Very good. Yeah, Matt, you just we just had the, sorry, just going up the, where is the credential exchange task force. So we're trying to define the different, the most used, the most popular exchanges, what they are, what their pros are, cons are, things like that. So that was in the the credential exchange. Where did that go? I didn't see it on the screen. But yeah, okay, there it is. That task force. So that, yeah, that kicked off today. Matthew does a great job. He's got some great slides in there with with links. And one of the drivers was, you know, the various open ID for verifiable potential issuance, verifiable presentation, but yeah, would, but all the other ones that are kind of in play, again, where, where could they, should they be used so that it's, so decision makers could decide what's best used for, I mean, I really think that credentialing is that is the new space economy. But you know, yeah, that's, that's my, yeah, yep, no, my perception. Yeah, probably why we're all here. Yeah, definitely. Yeah. So what are we doing as far as our architecture? Are we, we focused on telecommunications, or we're just focused on, you know, Indy, and, and the program, the various hyper ledger? Well, so, well, so yeah, so where Char is, God knows who is trust over IP. So now trust over IP's mission is, coincides with some of the hyper ledger projects there, but trust over IP is, is really identity focused and, you know, and it's Char is basically saying, look, when the internet was established, there was no, it had point to point, you know, I want to need to get from A to B, and, and the networking that's involved to do that is covered, but not the trust, we don't know who's, you know, at the other end. So trust over IP is the main mission is, well, how do we get trust into that IP stack? And so yeah, you can go to, yeah, if you haven't, trust over IP.org and the, the, we do have an architecture framework. I won't dwell on it here, but basically it divides it up into two halves, four layers. There's, you know, the technology stack and that's why it says at the top of the screen here, technology stack working group, well, there's technology on one side, governance or human on the other side. So in order for all this shit to work, right, we need laws, we need, yeah, well, that's the whole thing. I think that's part of the space economy. I mean, that is the new wild frontier. I mean, attorneys are like, they, I mean, they just set up, I'm having writer's block, but they just set up an oversight committee. But yeah, that's the arena I think that we're in. Yeah. And if you get the overall decentralized identity space, hyper ledger host code projects like indie areas and on creds, trust over IP is focused on governance and policy. You've got diff decentralized identity foundation, which is really focused on implementation. And there's a little bit of, I believe they're doing some standards work as well. And I think we've got a couple more updates to come. And then you've got places like the W3C where standards around decentralized identifiers and verifiable credentials are coming out of. Yeah, I put the W. The purpose of this SIG is to be pan identity. It's not just hyper ledger projects. We want to talk about everything that's going on in the ecosystem. And Sharrington and Fippen are doing a great job of programming, bringing folks from the outside, folks who aren't doing things with, with hyper ledger technologies, but to share so we can cross pollinate these ideas and, and, and not you. Thank you. Push the ecosystem forward. Yeah, thank you for defining that for me. Absolutely. Thanks for those updates and discussion on that. All right, the utility Foundry Group. It's on, hey, it is working with the governance architecture task force, still I believe. The ecosystem Foundry Group. Anybody attend that one at their meeting last week? Looks like they've been talking about the digital trust survey, digital ecosystem components and learning pathways, AP cyber presentation. How about the concepts and terminology working group? Anybody attend that one? So it looks like they're still working on the terminology engine V2, reviewing at the new TNO party driven actor model. So any other TIP announcements or progress updates? All right, moving on to the, the Diff, the decentralized identity foundation did come working groups since they meet on the first Monday of every month. We've reported on their recent meetings. Sound note as well that their next meeting will not be on July 3rd, the first Monday of July, but rather the second Monday of July. The Diff did come users group. It looks like in their most recent meeting they talked about demos and protocols, socket doc as well, which is, like I mentioned earlier, a, a WebSocket relay service that Diff recently open sourced and then as well did come marketing. Did anybody attend the Diff interoperability group or the IoT special interest group? Looks like they both had recent meetings. There was a presentation interoperability group on user adoption and interoperability, which looked interesting. Any other Diff updates? And for the W3C standard, as far as I can tell, I couldn't find more recent meeting notes from the Diff working group and the community credentials group. They've had recent traceability call and verifiable credentials for education task force. Does anybody have other updates for the W3C standard working groups or general working group updates or announcements? All right, with that, I think we can conclude the working group status updates portion of the call. And I can go ahead and turn it over to Vipin for, for exploration and discussion of the WEF paper. Vipin, would you like to screen share? Yes. Great. You can see my screen, I hope. Looks great. I'm going to go into slideshow mode so I'm, since I'm working on a laptop, I won't be able to see anybody else's comments or anything. So if anybody wants to bring it to my attention, please show up on audio and either question me or tell me some stuff about what's happening. So this is based on a, well, let's say a rather shallow reading of this paper because we had to scramble to put together this presentation since the person who was supposed to do this today is postponed to later. And I had also contacted Aidan Slavin, who was the lead author. And I know Aidan for a while because I was involved in the ID 2020 discussions. And I also saw in the paper that a lot of input was from the ID 2020 folks. So I'm familiar with enough of the concepts to be dangerous. So basically it's a swift pass through this background and summary. And for the first time, a world organization, maybe not for the first time, but still it's quite interesting that they are advocating for decentralized ID. Finally, then of course, they go into the challenges and the barriers to adoption of that decentralized ID. And they come up with some recommendations. And number six, the remarks on the next steps is my sort of contribution to this debate or this trust in getting this decentralized ID into a global arena. So the first thing of course is the ID overview, what is decentralized ID, various implementation recommendations. I don't want to dwell on this, you know, this is the summary from which I've taken from the paper itself. But the identity overview is very important, I believe, because here we are focused, very focused on the identity technology. And I think some of the questions that Brett asked, for example, what is the integration between Aries or Indy and Fabric is relevant because if you're going to put something out in production in the real world, for any purpose, it has to have an identity component. And it's important that identity component is well integrated, you know, mostly through standards, interoperability and other methods with the component itself. And I believe we don't spend enough time on this topic. And that was the focus of the old identity working group. But I am going to bring, you know, bring that perspective in here, not just the raw updates of different identity components and efforts, but having a much more systemic view of the whole thing. That means, how does identity fit in this ecosystem? Why is identity an important foundational concept and something to solve in a foundational way? So that's, you know, even they say it, but one of the UN's sustainable development goals. But unfortunately, it is a development goal 16.9, which means it's the ninth sub-paragraph of the 16th goal when there are 17 goals. But the first goal is, for example, abolish. I mean, there is a timeline to it too, which is basically that it's 2013. Not a first goal is abolish poverty, for example, or at least reduce poverty by 50%. And poverty is defined as making less than $1.25 a day, which may sound shocking to some of us, but $1.25 goes a long way in certain places. But still, you know, you can go to bed hungry, you may not have a place to sleep, and so on and so forth. But we have shown through the example of India, for example, that, you know, although implemented recently, it was started more than 15 years ago. The other ID, even though, you know, there are lots of things to criticize, has resulted in major transformation of even the first STG, which is reduced poverty by making sure that benefits flow directly to the recipients without the middleman siphoning off stuff, which is, you know, a feature of distribution in the developing world. Then it says, 850 million worldwide have no identity, and there is an identity lifecycle, registration, issuance, use and management. Registration differentiates between two separate types of identity. One is a genesis identity or a very vital identity, which is a government identity. First and foremost, is a birth certificate. So of some sort, an accomplishment that you were born, you are alive, and you are a citizen of country X. 850 million people have no identity, which basically means they don t even have a birth certificate, I believe, you know, that they can access and control. So the paper goes into details of the registration, issuance, use and management, mostly focused on methods and other ideas that we are familiar with in the developing world, but maybe not very widely, you know, if the 850 million worldwide have no identity, and 1.5 to 2 billion people are starving below 1.25 dollars per day, then we can talk all we want around here, but even in WEF, which is sort of a poster child for the rich people gathering in Davos, but it is a very influential organization. So all this stuff I just talked about. So in order to look at the 16.9 STG, which is to provide a legal identity, including birth registration by 2020, I think it is a laudable goal, but I don t think it s going to happen because there are real gaps, real problems. And of course, it s a development goal, not only as a standalone development goal, but it is all for a purpose to be participating in banking, finance, for gender equality, because women are not even recognized as people somewhere in some places, migration, labor market opportunities, and so on and so forth. There is a political threat, which is the lack of identity has brought forward in India. I don t know how familiar you are with what s happening in the northeast. In Assam, for example, they have required, if you cannot prove that you were, you know, you, your father, grandfather, your grandmother, somebody was a citizen of India in 1947, then you are considered not a citizen of India, which is kind of absurd, but that has resulted in the exclusion of a lot of people from and actually as a political threat in terms of deporting them into Bangladesh, somewhere else. And it s also a racial and sort of religious warfare. So all these are arising out of identity, which we may not be aware of, we are only, you know, focused on our problems, but these items are very important and it s highlighted to a certain extent in the WAF paper. And of course, you are familiar with this system here, Holder. Okay, so you have the issuer, holder and verifier triangle, and the verifier does not directly contact the issuer, issuer issues the credential to the holder, which is anybody having a wallet of some sort that is cryptographically protected and cryptographically can provide, can store cryptographic attestations of the issuance. And then in the presentation part where they want to rely on a verifier for any service for various other for speeding by a police officer, you have to present your driver s license, but the presentation in a decentralized ID case is meant to be only it s selective disclosure. That means you are basically only showing them your name, maybe, or you are a holder of a valid driver s license and that you are older than X. But that s not the case today. They can read a lot of things from the driver s license. Then of course, the one one-way street here between the issuer and the verifier, which is basically the verifier who can look at the credential and say, is that a valid credential by reading the data registry, which in our world is indie, for example, and the wallet that the holder holds is Aries. There is Didcom going on between various other entities and that wallet or various wallets. We don t even go into the details of having entities other than humans, like IoT s or companies or anything like that. But so this is the picture from the paper, which is a familiar picture, of course, for us. The challenges they note are that the standards are still under development and lacking definitions. These are general statements because even though we know that some of these things are being worked on, they are not accepted globally. And we have listed some of the organizations that we talked about just now, plus some other organizations like the European Union, the Architectural Reference Framework and EIDAS, which is going to be the topic of next calls presentation by Stefan, who s done a wonderful job of it before because he s part of the working group. And he has actually worked on EIDAS, either ARF or the wallet standard or various aspects. And he s very familiar with these things. So be here next call, which is in two weeks for that. But these are the challenges as per the paper. And the risks which we dwell down a little bit, political risk, data exploitation, which we haven t even talked about, which is basically using the data collected or either to do advertisements or surveillance or using that data to do political leverage, who s supposed to be, and so on. And of course, I think the risks of having that data are a bit of a bit of trouble hearing you, Vipin. The connection is breaking up a bit. I'm still not able to hear you too much, unless it s just me and my connection is bad. It s breaking up on my end, too. Are you there, Vipin? You hear bits and pieces from you, but not so coherent, unfortunately. Thanks for your note, Alfonso. Great to have you join. We ll see if Vipin is able to rejoin the call and maybe the connection will be better when he s back. Thank you, Char. See you in two weeks. Yeah, absolutely. We meet at the same time every two weeks. So looking forward to it. Bye-bye. Thanks. Bye. Thanks, Brett. Definitely. Thanks, everyone. I ll go ahead and wait to see if Vipin is able to rejoin. I ll try messaging him as well. Hi, Vipin. How s the connection now? I re-joined with my phone. I don t know why it s telling me that I m in safe driving mode when I m actually sitting down. I was just going over the paper. I had to reboot my computer. I don t know what happened over there. But anyway, how far did I succeed in getting? I don t even know. Yeah, we had started to cover the risks of decentralized identity, but I think that s about when things started to break up. And I know we just have a minute or two left in the call. So we might want to... Yeah, I mean, you know, the paper is kind of self-explanatory. There were about 12 slides in the call in the presentation, and I was on slide eight. And, you know, basically there were a bunch of barriers that they noted and technical recommendations but the most important one is the policy recommendations for adoption, which WEF is very sort of influential with. That happens to be the core of the paper, but it s basically things like reviewing policy, altering policy, develop enabling regulation, and improve privacy-intensing technologies. This is all applicable to decentralized identities, what they call it, not SSI. And future forward mechanisms and invest in public policy basically invest is the key recommendation. Invest in technology, invest in getting a good policy adoption, and invest in regulation, invest in training people in this. These are the recommendations. And as I said, my personal comments are, why is this influential? It is extremely influential. And because of the WEF, a lot of government officials show up there. And there are technological methods for implementation and the technological capability for implementation. Both of these have to be improved and participate in multiple venues, which is what we are doing anyway. Sorry about that. Next time I'll close everything before I just do this presentation. Maybe I am running AI in the background. I don't know. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I'm sorry you got cut off. I think it was really useful to take the time to go over the paper. So, thank you. Yeah, and also Aidan Slavin is going to come back here later and he will do a much fuller presentation. And hopefully we can divert enough time for that for him. And instead of just running down a list of updates, which we always do. Yeah, yeah. No, I definitely agree. We could cut some of that out to leave more time for the presentation. All right, so he'll come back and we have the next three presentations on our agenda. And thanks for listening and thank you. Yeah, absolutely. Thanks so much, Pipin. And thanks Lynn and Charles for hanging around. And we'll see you all in two weeks. All right. Thank you. Bye.