 I mean, you know, I had mentioned beforehand, there are a couple ideas, very plausible ideas to sort of overcome the networking effects of centralization and really get to a more decentralized internet. I mean, so even right now, so at a very basic level, things like YouTube, so I'm a YouTuber, whatever, YouTube has a go eventually. Yes, people probably listening to this know YouTube has implemented new policies of, you know, they now videos that don't actually go against any YouTube terms of service, they now reserve the right to restrain, they can, you know, disable likes, disable related videos, disable link to the author, even if they don't, you know, if they're just usually right-wing, you know, content or something. So that's something they've started doing a lot. But anyway, there are very plausible, you know, sort of arriving, arising alternatives to YouTube that I think are promising. One of them comes to mind is BitShoot. I don't know if anyone's ever heard of this, but it's instead of using, so YouTube, I believe how it works is you really just have the videos on servers. When you access YouTube, you're really just downloading the video, you're viewing it on your computer. BitShoot is interesting because it uses like BitTorrent protocols. So yeah, and this makes it immune to, it's a small site now, but it makes it immune to diseconomies of scale. So if you go on a site like this and you watch a video, you're using BitTorrent to download it just in your browser. So you're getting pieces from different users. So it makes for, it eliminates, it basically has an economic, you know, superiority to YouTube that avoids, you know, it gets rid of the, a lot of the problems, a lot of startup video sites have. And it also, BitShoot in particular, happens to be very committed to things like free speech, specifically right-wing speech. If you go there now, it's mostly, you know, alt-right content, but there are a lot of other stuff as well. There are also, I should say, so GNU has this project ongoing called the Media Goblin, which is very interesting. I think it's very promising. I don't use it myself because it's still sort of wonky, but it's an interesting idea. And that is, you know, people, one of the things people like about Facebook and stuff like this is that they have, you know, you have a common framework for liking things, sharing things, sort of protocol that make, makes intuitive sense to people. But Media Goblin, what it is, is kind of decentralized way of doing that, where you really just run your own Media Goblin server, where you put your own content, your own videos, your own pictures, people can come and like them. You can have members, you know, eventually they're going to have this in sort of a decentralized network. So you can have really different, you know, everyone is a king of their own castle, and you can, if you want to block users, you can. But ultimately no one can get blocked from the whole system. It's totally decentralized. And this is similar to, people might be familiar with what's called GNU Social, which is sort of a Twitter equivalent or Facebook equivalent, where there are really just different servers where you can sign up and all of them are sort of interconnected. They all have different terms of service, stuff like this. Yeah, this is the problem with those things. I mean, I don't, I'm not familiar with the other ones, they sound interesting. But like, ideally what you want is people, like you want people to have it to be easy for people to sort of run their own little website. And the website kind of just the nature of the whole internet itself should make it easy to do things like discoverability and, you know, social interaction and so on. And the problem with kind of like layering these partial services on top of the internet is like it kind of crams you into a particular model still for your website. And then like once you're crammed into a particular model, it's always kind of more convenient to go with a centralized, essentially maintained one. And like with YouTube in particular, the sort of alternative, the decentralized alternative to YouTube is everyone kind of just hosting videos on their own site and it's really easy to make a site. But the problem with that, you know, I mean, first of all, it's just difficult to do that. Second of all, all the discoverability stuff on YouTube and sort of all the economies of scale of the software of YouTube kind of don't work quite as well. Like there's these centralized systems have a lot going for them naturally. Again, it's like the proprietary thing. Like there's areas where the centralized system is going to work best. And you kind of want there to be alternatives, but in some cases the alternative is not actually going to work better. Well, a lot of these protocols do, they do have discoverability and that you can connect with different sites and people can media goblin hasn't implemented it itself. But if you go on, for example, any implementation of GNU social, you can look at, for example, only the posts there, or you can look at posts on related networks or friend networks, or you can even look at posts on Twitter and stuff like that. Of course, Twitter doesn't want to implement, you know, GNU social, but GNU social can look at Twitter, no problem. But there's something at least to me that feels unnatural about the way a lot of these decentralized free software social network things work. I understand what you mean in the sense that, I mean, the goal of the internet in the old days is I have my website, I do my own thing, it's my own kingdom. And this is sort of like that. But I guess they do add this extra layer of commonality. This is how you like things. This is how you share things. Yeah, like they're adding another layer that isn't really properly thought out as a whole other layer.