 Sorry for switching the topic last minute, but at the same time, this was too good to let it go. So we just read about Google pulling off the Synogen mod app from the store, and that got us thinking about... I mean, there's always this debate about how open is Android, right? It's kind of open source, right? But is it really an open platform? Apple is very clear about where they stand. So I think I wanted to get a bunch of people together who can talk about what this really means, how much control we think Google should have, and just sort of have a very open flowing sort of conversation. So I'm just going to introduce, or let everyone introduce themselves on the panel. Arvind, do you like to start? Hi, I'm Arvind Krishna Swamy. I'm one of the co-founders of a company called Levitum. I'm also the program chair here for DroidCon. Hi, I'm Kiran. I'm a co-founder of Hasgeek, and I'm one of the organizers of DroidCon. Hey, I'm Aditya Kulkarni. I'm one of the co-founders of Little Eye Labs, but I think the reason I'm on this panel is because I used to be a PM at Google. My name's Christopher Nagyabar. I'm an Android specialist at Hasgeek Labs in Australia. Been coding in Android for three years now. Here to be the international guy on the panel. And I'm Gaurav. I also work at Little Eye. I've been helping with the event. And so, again, we're going to do this a little differently. We're not really going to have a moderator. All of us are going to try to pitch in, and I'm hoping it's going to get controversial. If it gets really, really nasty, then I might have to pitch in and slap people around, but I won't do too much of that. So we'll just let it be self-moderated and let the conversation flow. And we'll talk for a little bit about to set some context, and then after that we'll open it up and you guys should join in the fun. So I'm just going to start off with some context. So, Arvi, what really do you, like, what is Cyanogen Mod? And what was the Cyanogen Mod app all about? Anyone, actually. I'll leave it open to the... Kiran, you want to say something? Wait for that to stop. So what we're talking about is Cyanogen Mod, which is the most popular custom rock for Android at the moment, which is basically taking the source releases of Android that Google have put out and made custom installations of it so people can install them on phones where the manufacturers are slow to release new updates, things like that. And so the app was an installer for it for the Play stores that people didn't have to go through a confusing process to install it, because it was quite difficult when I tried it out a few years ago. Cool. And what is, I guess the other question is, what is the connection with Cyanogen Mod and the Google source, right? So how is Cyanogen Mod different from a stock Android kernel? Anyone? It's open. Okay, so I was, again, setting context, right? So how is Cyanogen Mod different from Android, from the open, from a stock Android installation? Okay, I think one of the things that people need to realize is that nobody uses a stock Android installation. Even if you use a Nexus phone, what you have is not stock. What you have is Google's version of Android. The Android open source project is not the same thing as a Nexus image. I think most people tend to miss this, the fact that these are two separate things and that's very important, because Cyanogen Mod is based on AOSP. It is not based on Google's release of Android. Yeah, I think that's a significant point. I think we, when we think of Android and you think of all the apps that you currently use on your phone, most of you right now use the Gmail app, right? You don't use the email app that's lying on your phone. For those of you who have now started to use KitKat, you've probably seen that in addition to the Gallery app, there's a new Photos app out there. Now, something that you may not be aware of is what's been happening over time is as and when Google has been releasing their own version of these apps, they've been stopping contribution to the open source. Okay, let me just quickly repeat that. So the point I was trying to make is, right, see, many of you here probably have an email app on your phone and the Gmail app on the phone and the email app likely never gets used. For those of you who have upgraded to KitKat, you probably have noticed that you've got the Gallery app but you've also got the Google Photos app. So what Google has sort of been doing over time is as and when they've come out with their own versions of these apps with much more powerful Google features, they've stopped contributing back to the Android open version of those apps. So over time, sort of the vanilla search app, the vanilla email app, the vanilla Gallery app are over time just dying out. So in a sense, what starts to happen is, although Android's code is open, right, it still isn't in a mode where anyone else can take it and do what they want with it without being restricted in other ways. With the open handset alliance, there are still restrictions with respect to these hardware vendors working with someone else. You probably heard the story about how Amazon tried reaching out to Acer and tried to involve Acer in building one of their devices. But word has it that Google then reached out to Acer and then indicated that since they were part of this alliance, they couldn't work with others. So this really limited the number of hardware vendors that Amazon could work with to use Android and do anything with it. So with this, right, open source has a certain meaning, but open as a platform with respect to how it can be used starts to have a different meaning. And with some of these recent things that Google has steadily been doing in the last one year where they've stopped contributing to the search app, to the mail app, they've stopped contributing to the gallery app, they've stopped contributing to the camera app, right, and now with this announcement of having, you know, rejected Cyanogen Mod, where Cyanogen Mod now needs to locate either Sony Store or the Amazon Store. Now arguably for developers out here, this is not going to stop us, right, side loading is not difficult. It means grabbing it and side loading it, we would do it. But it's sort of a broader question with respect to where this is going in the ecosystem, which I think it's important for us to think about and ask these questions. And I think we have a responsibility here. So, you know, just to pigeon, right, so I think the core question we're getting at is, is Android really open, right? Is it's open, so what is open source mean, what is open? And my view is kind of a little bit different, right? I mean, obviously it's colored because I used to be at Google. I was not a PM for Android, but if I were a PM for Android, right, like my thinking would be different, right? So my perspective is that the main reason Android got to Google claims that Android is open is it's a regulatory problem, right? I read a report somewhere that now Android has something like 70, 80% of the global smartphone market share now. So that's in monopoly territory and people underestimate how painful it is to work with regulators, right? Like, it's for a long... If you're... Once you start getting into that monopoly territory, people start to, like all these regulators, start to come and knock in your doors and get you to do things their way. And that's not something any company or any product manager wants, right? So I think Google is trying to do that balance here, right? So they want to be able to say that, hey, Android is open, anybody can fork it. You can do what you want. While at the same time, a product manager's natural instinct is to protect their product and make sure that that product has as much market share as possible, right? So that's the trade-off game that's being done here. Google is not really committed... This is kind of controversial. Don't quote me on this, but Google's not really committed to open source, right? I mean, that's just... That's the... You got this on video, right? That's the unfortunate truth of it, right? Like, Google bought Android in 2007 or whatever that was to make money. Like, Google is a corporate company. You have shareholders. You have to realize that they're in it to make money. And anything that they do to keep the regulators away, they can do to make sure... But at the same time, they'll also make sure that, you know, they're not... The search app is primary property, right? Google's are making a lot of money now on mobile. I think it's like over a billion dollars in revenue or quarter now. So Google's naturally going to protect that. And it's... Like, I don't think it... You know, Google's not insane. Like, they're not going to keep releasing these things out in the open so that anybody can go and copy that. I think, you know, Google's sweet spot is something like, you know, 80%, 70%. So as long as the other OSAs, other versions out in the market are in that range, Google's happy and they want to keep that balance. But they will always try to control and capture all the value that's being created. And today, you can see a lot of steps that Google's doing in this direction, right? I mean, it's not just about pulling the hydrogen model, but you can see that consciously Google is pushing more and more towards play services, right? And trying to... It seems like they're consciously trying to move functionality from the core OS to play services. Because they control play services, they do not control the OS as much as they would like. And you'll see that this keeps on intensifying. And I don't think this is a one-off phenomenon. This is continuing to happen. Google's going to continue to consolidate. Because see, at the end of the day, right? Like, you know, imagine you're a PM sitting in a review room with Larry and you're telling Larry, hey, look, we got so much, so many users, so many smartphones, etc., etc. And Larry's going to be like, so how much money are you guys making? And the PM's going to be like, ask me again next quarter, right? So, you know, that's just not sustainable. So it's... I don't think this is a one-off incident. Google's going to continue to push in this direction. And we as developers kind of need to anticipate and prepare for this. I think the point... Something you want to... The point you made about play services is interesting. Because I think of Android as three layers, right? And from a licensing perspective, there's the kernel, which Google had to make... I mean, it's GPL. They use the Linux kernel. So if they're making changes, they actually have to make that open right away, right? And so they can't protect that. Then they have the platform on top, right? So the entire frame... As an app developer, when you're using their Java libraries, that entire platform is made open when they release, right? So when Google releases KitKat, you will get to see that. But you won't get to see that three months before the release or during the development of KitKat. In fact, I think Honeycomb, one of the three dot... All of them. Basically, Google withheld and said, we're not going to release this source to anyone because we kind of did it in a hurry and we don't want people to sort of take that source and build crappy experiences. So they've actually withheld the source of one of those releases. And then you have the layer on top, sort of the apps and services, right? So it started off with Gmail and a bunch of maps. Maps is a very cool app which is not open source. You can't go and modify the Google map source. But Play Services is the other hook that they have, right? So now, if you're building an app and you're using Google's Play Services, you're still sort of locked into their platform. If somebody comes up, you know, a manufacturer comes up with a fresh platform and decides to take out Play Services, then developers will have to rebuild some of those things. So Google is making sure that they have a stronghold somewhere, right? So I want to sort of grab that idea of Google withholding releases like they did with version 3. Something that you get from Apple as an iOS developer is once they announce that there's going to be a new version of iOS, they put out public beaters for all their developers. Developers get an idea of what the new platform is going to be for months in advance. I'm wondering, like, this is not something that happens with Android. Basically, we as developers, we get Android at the same time as the general public gets it. So there's maybe six months until we can say, we've got an app that really supports, you know, version 4.4. And whether open... Google having to release the source of the platform is hindering their ability to provide for developers. Yeah, that's an interesting point, right? Like, the relationship that Google has with developers is kind of good and bad at this point, right? Like, Google obviously wants high-quality apps on their store, but at the same time, they don't want to, like, go the open source route and push out all the code out there so that people can, you know, so that Samsung just forks it and takes all the money, right? But, like, I don't know, like, how Google is going to sort of maintain that balance, right? The other variable that Google is working with is that... And this is going to be, like, really bad for developers, right? But Google really wants to lock in developers. Like, if you are able to develop apps that work easily on Google and on iOS, that's really bad for Google, right? I mean, I know it's not politically correct to say so, but it is, right, because you can switch your app, right? And what's happening on the... Google's really frustrated with... I think Google's really frustrated with what's happening. They're like, most developers write first for iOS, and then if it works, then they port it to Android, right? And that's something that is probably not going well, right? And I think, I mean, I don't know what the clear steps are, but I think you'll start to see this more and more going forward. Like, Google will try to lock in developers into Android. Like, see, Microsoft had a lot of success with this in the earlier days of Windows 95 and up, right? Like, they literally locked in developers into that platform and with the Win3rdoo APIs so that developers could never actually... It was very hard to jump ship, but today it's really easy for an Android developer... Well, it's not really easy, but it's kind of easy for an Android developer to move and build apps for, like, Windows and iOS. It's not that hard, but I think that's another thing to think about. Like, you know, US developers, like, you're coming here and you're kind of... If you're committing yourself to Android and, you know, Google... In the PR, they keep saying, you know, HTML5 is cool, you know, build all these portable apps and blah, blah, blah, but you really have to think about whether that is going to remain true for the long term, right? Whether it's going to be easy for US developers, whether you're sort of getting... Go lock into this Android ecosystem along with Google. So, signage and mod, right? Now, they get the source when Google releases it and then they modify it and do their tweaks. Is that how it works? Right, and there's quite often a lag from when Google do their release so KitKat came out a month ago now and they still don't have a version of signage and mod that runs off the KitKat source because, you know, there's this source release that's done at the same time as the general public release but the signage and mod version 4.4 still lags after a few months. I mean, it's quicker than maybe Samsung will produce a version 4.4 mod, but signage and mod will still lag after. And, I mean, some of the nice things about signage and mod... You've used signage and mod a lot, so maybe you can talk about why someone would want to install that over... Actually, I have a question for you. This works, right? So, I have a question for you. So, what regulatory issue prevents Google from releasing the code before it's released? Has this been disconnected, guys? Okay, so what regulatory issue prevents Google from putting out code while it's working progress? So, I think that particular issue is not a regulatory problem. I think that's more of a, you know, protecting business interest, right, like you're pointing out. Signage and mod necessarily has to lag behind Android. Like, now it would be really bad if signage and mod produced a working version for the S4 while Samsung is not struggling to, you know, push a 4.3 out onto them, right? So, I know certainly back in the version 2 days of Android, there were lots of really awful tablets coming out of China that were running version 2.2, 2.1 that weren't, you know, that weren't very good, and one of the arguments I saw was that delaying the release of the source codes dot manufacturers from producing devices that were running, you know, alpha versions of 2.2 in order to, so, you know, we've got version 2.2 before anyone else. Whether or not that's so much the case these days, I'm not sure. But to sort of get to your question also, right, like what are the regulatory problems, right? So, one of the issues is always, you know, the European Competition Commission and the same with the U.S. ones. So, if a, let's say a version of KitKat, right, it gets like 40% or like maybe even 50% of the market share and Google Search is the default search on that, then Microsoft is going to come in and say, look, they have an unfair advantage on that and, you know, the regulatory commission can actually make Google kind of offer a choice of search engine at boot up or something like that, right? This happened on Windows, by the way, right? Like a lot of people, I think including Google, a lot of forced Microsoft. So, I don't know if anybody has installed Internet Explorer recently, but the first time you bring it up, it actually asks you for a choice of default search engine, right, Yahoo or Google or whatever that is. And Chrome does that. And Chrome does that too, right? So, that kind of like moved a little bit backfire on Google before they thought of Chrome, but they really don't want to get into the same state on Android, right? If one single version of Android gets an extraordinary amount of market share, the regulators are going to be behind them saying that you need to do something about it. Today, Google has a great excuse, right? Well, it's not an excuse, but Google has a great argument, right? It's like, hey, look, anybody can do it, right? Like, well, Sanjian Mod is, you know, going and taking the source and they're doing their own thing, and Amazon has forked off Android, I don't know when, but they have their own thing. So, that kind of, so, I mean, right? So, they have, but you know, so that's a great defense, right? So, if I was a PM on Google, like, I'd be like, look, this is, this is a great trade-off, right? Like, we will let 20% of the, 20% of the phones out there run something other than Google, other than Android, while maintaining most of the powerful core functionality that we can profit from. So, should we open it up? Is there anything else? I think Pratul had a question there. Cool. That's right. Give Pratul the mic that doesn't work. Hello. Hey. So, a couple of points here. One was that, as you said, Gaurav correctly, that the kernel, they can't do anything about because it's GPL, and because the kernel is licensed under a GPL, V2, they can't really lock it up and say that, hey, we aren't releasing this. But then, intentional or not, Google not releasing the Android source code, or as Jay said, maintaining a separate fork for the Nexus devices is completely valid, and it's completely, I'd say normal because it's under the Apache license, and that's what it allows them. It allows them to maintain a separate commercial fork and pretty bad echo. Hello. Hello. Hello. Hello. Better? So, I'll repeat my point. My point was that Google not releasing Android while they're developing it or maintaining a separate tree for, say, the Nexus devices is completely alright because the Android system, apart from the kernel, is licensed under Apache, and Apache allows you to maintain the commercial, allows you to use open source code and merge it with commercial code and then not release it, not release the entire system at all. That's completely allowed, and that's I'm guessing by choice because then they get to do what they're doing right now and maintain a separate tree for the Nexus lines but not actually have all of the Nexus features in, say, AOSP. So, I think I got worried. So, he's saying that the platform that Google doesn't release, it's basically Apache, right? So, they can do what they want. It's okay for them to not release it for three months, right? So, from a licensing perspective, yes. Right? But if it were the GPL, they'd still be able to sit on it for three months because they don't have to put out the source until they publish it. So, you know, it doesn't matter what license it is. Yeah, so I think it's not so much about the licensing. I think it's more about just, we're probably trying to clarify what does open mean, and the fact that it's open source doesn't mean that it's available to everyone as and when it's being developed, right? And there is an impact to that. I think Chris raised a really good point that if they made it available as they're developing, then you'd have manufacturers build crappy tablets with alpha versions, right? But it does also give, you know, it gives Google an edge over other companies that want to innovate on top, right? So, another thing, one point that you missed while explaining the Synogen Mod situation was Google's official answer to why they removed the Synogen Mod installer is that it encourages people to void their devices' warranty, which is what they don't want people to do. They said that there's nothing wrong with the installer, but because it's a, as an application on the Play Store, it is encouraging people to void device warranty. They can't allow it. That was their official answer. You guys get the question. I didn't fully hear the question. There's pretty bad echo here. Google currently permits a number of routed apps. That's true. So, yes, exactly. That's my point. Yeah. It's a routed app. Is there a titanium backup? So, could everyone hear his Prathu's point? Which is that Synogen Mod, Google's basically pulls Synogen Mod's app out, but there are a lot of other apps on the store that support routing, right? So, why Synogen Mod? Right, why they've singled that out? Yeah, meaning if it was voiding the warranty with sort of the concern, then why would it be this one, right? So, it's only speculation at this point, but the influence of Synogen Mod is likely increasing. And, I mean, I think this is sort of... Synogen Mod does have some nice properties that a lot of the other, like a Samsung version of Android will not have, right? So, they've done a lot around optimizing for battery. They've done a lot around... You can limit, like, they don't have all of this Google services tied in, right? So, if you don't trust some of those services, you can get Synogen Mod, which is, how do I put it? A lot cleaner, right? If that's the right... And if you're using, say, a Samsung device, then you don't have their awful proprietary UI stuff added on to it as well. So, you get a better experience out of the stock Android. Yeah, you can upgrade older devices to new Android OS versions. Any other questions, thoughts? Hello. Can you hear me? Yeah. So, first of all, I'm a big fan of Synogen Mod, and I've been using it for the past one and a half, two years. So, it might be better if you don't use the mic and speak up, right? Because at least there's a very bad echo here. Yes. No, but see, this is like Google make... You know, have you seen the Godfather? This is like Google making them an offer they can't refuse, right? So, like, you know, you take it out or we shoot you. Or else we'll be forced to take action. I think those are the words. So, yeah. Yeah, makes routing easy. It makes it easy for you to move easily to an ad-free experience. Which says... No, and I think that's, again, an interesting point, right? Google asked them to remove the app. If they had put a disclaimer, right? I think that wouldn't have made a difference. I think the difference here is that Google made a big deal about Android being open source and open platform. They had this thing called the Open Hands Satellites. They used this word open, open, open, and then suddenly they have this play services thing which pretty much is not open at all. And that sort of flies in the face of them saying that what they have is an open platform. I mean, they don't really say they have an open platform that much now, but they certainly did a couple of years ago. Yeah, I think this is like, you know, Google redefining the word open, right? Like, you're going to start seeing more and more of this, I think. But it doesn't come as a surprise to me at all. This is something that any large corporation... I mean, just think about it, right? Like Linux, Linus in 91, he wrote this amazing OS kernel. It's used in like billions and billions. More Linux kernels than people on the planet today, right? But he didn't get much out of that, right? I mean, he's got like internet points, but like no real money, right? And that's not something that Google can afford. And I don't think any of the corporations are going to end up doing that. And one of the things I think, you know, to take from this is like, what does this mean for us as developers, right? Like, you know, trying to understand this ecosystem, so we have to kind of look beyond the PR, right? Like, all these companies, including Apple and Google and Microsoft, they all claim, you know, we are developers' friends, and have you seen that Steve Bummer video where he goes, developers, developers, like... So they're all kind of committed to developers, but we've got to take all of this with a pinch of salt, right? Like, every single large corporation, every single platform player will try to lock you down. Like, if they are not doing it now, they're going to do it later, and it's going to move in that direction. So we need to think about what we as developers can do to sort of... First of all, is that good for us, or is that something we want to encourage? How can we as developers profit from this? And, or, you know, if you have the other perspective of... This is probably not a good thing, and we as developers should fight all these platform guys and try to keep it open, right? See, I think to start with the... I think we should all begin to ask these questions. We should talk about this, because these are important issues, right? So we need to start to raise these questions and forums, talk about it, raise visibility to this issue. And I think we can also step back for a minute and talk about what we think openness has meant to us in the past. Because when you think of open, right, then you put aside mobile for a minute. You think of the web. And the web has been open for a while. And the openness of the web, right, has never put us in a situation where a single company's policy, or even potentially a single government's policy, let's say the United States, would stop us from functioning here. Here, we're heading towards a direction where most of our country is going to be using Android devices. All the apps are in the Play Store. Who knows, for some foreseeable reason in the future, things change politically. What is the impact of that? So is there a room where... So how does it matter to us developers? Maybe what are some of the things that maybe mean a little more to us in the near term? Maybe it's more alternative Play Stores which are not tied to any of these large entities. Like it doesn't need to be Sony or Amazon. Maybe it's a more independent one. Maybe it's models where there's other means of validation. Which, sorry, go ahead. And certainly you had this idea of having alternative stores for getting your apps from. And all the different vendors out there that are trying to make a substantial market share in Android, so Samsung, Sony, just to name a couple, are all going out and making their own app stores. And I'm wondering whether or not that's a productive way of going about it because instead of having one big United Front to sort of go against the Play Store with its policies, we've got all these different small efforts that aren't going to make much of an impact except for maybe Samsung's, but even then that's still not going to get the whole market share. Right, so the problem seems to be that the app store themselves don't have distribution. How do you get the app store on the phone in the first place before you can bundle apps through their store? And I don't see any of them having a solution to this. Even if you look at Samsung, which is arguably the best position for promoting an alternative store, their own store is not available on any non-Samsung phone, which means then it's just not that interesting to a developer. And that's by their own choice as well. So they're trying to convince people to put their apps onto the Samsung store and they'll only appear on Samsung devices, but Samsung devices also have the Play Store, so why would you bother? Any other, yeah, there's a question. No, is it okay? Yeah, so there was this tweet a while ago where I don't remember the context, but then I think it was Rob Pike who tweeted saying, this is open, and then he said, you know, you can clone the Android thing and then you can work on it. I think, sorry, can you slide down? Or just move the mic. I think it's, you're loud enough. Just move the mic, just don't use the mic. Did everyone get the comment or should we repeat that? Okay, so I'll try my best to repeat that, but I think he was saying that in the beginning, you know, do users even care about sort of what Google does? And I think he was talking about how initially, Synergy and Mod, like Google may, so people associate even Samsung with Google, like a Samsung device or a Samsung OS is still associated with Google, an Android device, any Android device, and Synergy and Mod kind of helped that because it allowed people to get an OS which wasn't really associated with one of these guys, and it was better in a lot of ways, and so it was convenient for Google at some point, right? But now Google is actually feeling threatened by Synergy and Mod, and so now it's convenient for them to push it aside, right? Is that a fair... Yeah, no, you're absolutely right. So the question is, you know, as I understand, the question was that, okay, so we're out of time, but we'll do this last question, right? So the question was that, you know, Google is interested in keeping other OSes alive, but why are they killing Synergy and Mod now? So I think the answer is that Synergy and Mod has crossed from being a developer favorite to being a user favorite, right? And I think that is the red line in Google's mind. Like, once you cross that... Say, Google wants to be friendly to developers, right? Because they really want all of you to invest your time and energy and money into Android, but once something crosses that line and it's out in the open, that's a clear and present danger to Google's dominance of the system, and I think that was what triggered that. But just to sort of, you know, I'll be brought up a really good point earlier that the web has been open for a long time, and if you think about it, who has benefited from an open web? It's developers, right? Like, you know, it was really easy to do a web startup to create a lot of value in that. I think there's a lot of value for us as developers to keep mobile OSes as open as we can, and I think this is a fight that we're going to unfortunately have to fight and make sure that we are pushing with the Googles and the Amazon and the Microsofts to try to... And, you know, sort of keep them honest and keep them from closing off parts of the system because at the end of the day, developers are the ones that are going to benefit from an open ecosystem. Yeah, and just to add to that, I mean, I don't think... I mean, I think all of us, you admire Google, right? More than many other companies, they've had such a beautiful positive impact to all of our lives, enriching it in ways which people could not have imagined 10 years back. But, and I don't think we're saying they're evil, right? But ultimately, they are a corporate. They have certain interests in mind, but I think the checks and balances here and they've got a certain stranglehold in the ecosystem here, but I think it's important we start to have these discussions. And as developers, we can keep drinking the Kool-Aid, but there's some places we've got to draw a line and ask some of these questions and think about it. But I don't think... I don't think we're sort of bashing Google here, saying it's like Microsoft the way they were in the 90s. I don't think that's the situation here. I think Google's been great and I think the change they've impacted with Android has been phenomenal. But I think there's still areas here where the initial promise which maybe drew a lot of us to Android to make us believe in it, I think now we're starting to see some questions. And I think it's important we talk about it and maybe there's ways in which we'll strike some balance there. Yeah, and I think we're pretty much out of time, but you reminded me of a really interesting presentation where someone from Microsoft, I think it was JS, Fu, or MetaRefresh, someone from Microsoft came and talked about how, you know, a while ago we had IE6 and we did custom stuff and we kind of forced developers to build to our platform and that was bad and now Google's doing the same, so please don't fall for that trap. And it was really interesting, right? Someone from Microsoft is talking about a strategy they used when they were on top, but now Google's picking up a lot of traction on the browser and they're saying, hey, don't do the same with Google. Don't let Google do that to you. And so there is also, you know, the company that's on top does end up having power and, you know, these checks and balances are important. So hope you enjoyed the panel. All of us will be at the event. We can chat more about this. Are we, I think, getting sponsorship from Google next year is going to be a little tricky after this panel, but, yeah, thanks everyone for participating. Thank you.