 So, I'm going to just, this is just reviewing the things that are in a logo, computer culture. Computer, a language to talk to the computer in with, things to play with, and the children as explorers, creators, and researchers. And the anthropomorphic thinking sort of became body-syntonics where kids were the computer, or the turtle, they identified, or some other controllable device. And in the process they were debugging not only the programs but themselves. So, let's say, to review, to review the elements that form the logo culture. And what we talked about before the anthropomorphic thinking is that the children, as we have seen in the video, the children became the turtle, doing the movements, and that helped them to purify the programs. This is saying the same thing in a different way. Yes, this is more or less the same with other words, right? So, I just want to contrast it a little bit with scratch. We can compare it with the elements that form the culture of scratch. Scratch, Mitchell Resnick is the person whose group developed scratch. And originally he was wanting a programming language for computer clubhouses. They could use computer clubhouses, which are programming clubs that were born in the United States, in depressed neighborhoods, in which kids, well, in several disadvantaged neighborhoods, would go there to spend the afternoon so they wouldn't be on the street, right? And they would do things with the computer. For middle school, high school, not for elementary. So, for me, the scratch computer culture consists of children, computers and sprites, and a place to make stories and games, and a place to show and share projects safely. In fact, the best thing about scratch is its website, where children can safely, or adults, can safely post their projects. There are a lot of volunteers and paid people who are checking what goes on. And that's impressive. And I like the emphasis on remixing, that you're not stealing, you're proudly declaring that you got the idea from someone else. So, I'm impressed with the scratch computer culture. That is a computer culture. So, now I use turtle geometry, turtle graphics. It's not very happy with scratch. Scratch was designed to make games and tell stories. And, of course, that's what I did with children and logo. But there are alternatives. There's turtle art, which is... And there's a... There's a turtle art, which is a... A turtle art, which is a... And there's a logo. There is a version of logo called turtle logo, which runs around. And then, snap. The person that designed snap. His name is Brian Harvey. And he was part of the logo contingent a long time ago. So, in snap, you have a pointer. So you can see what direction it moves. He was the leader of the snap project. He had worked with the people of the logo for many years. Snap is a fort scratch. Snap is built on scratch. It's got other features that Brian Harvey missed in scratch. And Brian is a retired faculty member of California Berkeley, which is why Snap is housed in Berkeley. Brian Harvey is retired, but he's been a professor at the University of Berkeley. That's why Snap's servers are in Berkeley. And a couple of years ago, a few of us went to Jamaica and did a turtle art workshop in two girls' summer camps. And this is a piece of the video if I can find it. This is Artemis. That's me. Art is a project that Brian Silverman, who was a close collaborator with the University of Berkeley, and worked at Logo Computer Systems, building several logos. And is now a close collaborator of Mitchell Resnick. He sort of was very in any way involved with scratch, blah, blah, blah. Brian and Artemis do turtle art. Turtle art is a language that we've seen. They created Artemis Pappers, the daughter of Pappers, and Brian Silverman, who had worked with them in Logo, with different roles, and had also worked with Mitchell Resnick in the development of scratch. And I just wanted to end with a few words. And I just wanted to end with these people, Mitchell Resnick and Natalie Rusk. And that's Eric Rosenbaum, and Eric is the designer with his partner of the Makey Makey board. And if some of you, you 3D beetle blocks, which is written in snap. And this, of course, is App Inventor. And the person who built App Inventor is this person, Hal Abelson. And Hal Abelson is a professor at MIT, but when he was a graduate student, he was part of the Logo Group. Here we are taking a picture of the creator of App Inventor. He is not Cosignacio, the creator of App Inventor. He is this one here, which is Hal Abelson. And Hal had worked with them in the Logo Group, even though he is a professor at MIT. And you know who these people are. That's it. Thank you. That's it. They'll stand up, though. Do you have questions? Yes. So, Cynthia, at the beginning of your presentation, you said that in these 50 years, there are things that haven't changed. So what are we doing wrong for things not to change? What we should be doing? What things have to change? You're going to change them. I was surprised talking to a couple of people yesterday that computers aren't everywhere. And in schools and in children's hands. I didn't mention one laptop per child, that Seymour Papert and Nicholas Negroponte and a couple of other people started. And that was to get computers, make computers cheap enough to get in the hands of all children everywhere. I have an XO somewhere in my suitcase. I mentioned it during your presentation. I did mention it when I presented the project One Laptop Per Child, which Seymour Papert and Nicholas Negroponte launched a few years ago, which at that time was the director of the Media Lab at MIT. It was precisely about how all children in the world had a very cheap computer. How much was the One Laptop Per Child? $100. That's what they wanted it to be. Not enough of them were being sold. So they were closer to $200. But what they did was they forced Microsoft and end all those people to make cheap. They served a really good purpose. The original idea was that it was sold at $100, but they didn't agree with enough governments and enough entities didn't sell enough. And the price was around $200. But what the project did achieve was that other manufacturers had to lower a lot of prices and start selling very cheap mini-portals. So part of the objective was done. Any other questions? No? Are you impressed? Yes, I am. I loved it. Well, I think we give another big round of applause to Cynthia.