 But they were all people who were told that things were impossible. That social equality for African Americans in the South was impossible. That women having the right to vote was impossible. Their answer to this was, of course, not only possible, but these things are necessary. So the only question is not is it possible, the only question is how to achieve it. And justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. Our students are graduating into a world that we all know is the age of AI, the age of incredible impact from technology. And the most important question really is whether or not that age will make those problems of the great pulling apart worse, more inequality, more polarization, more disenfranchisement, more alienation? Or is it going to be a part of the solution? Help us come out of those dynamics. I take that question to be the work of public interest technology. I used to work with someone and he would always say, let's do it in the name of science. But I think of changing that to, is this the right thing to do? And how many people can this help? Or unfortunately sometimes we have to ask the question, how many people could this hurt? Often when a technology comes to market, it puts society in a situation and they take it or leave it's situation. And increasingly we're just not able to protect those laws, we're not able to stand up for our rights, not even to know when we're harmed. A lot of our students have had tremendous success in doing experiments that just simply quantify and show there is a harm. And what that does is it allows the people who would normally help society help us, you know, with regulators or policymakers or advocates and so forth. You show them how that this technology is having this problem. And the students, the work they've done, has gone on to change laws and inspire new regulations and change business practices at the big tech companies. In our cybersecurity clinic has a DEI focused to it and so students are going out supporting small businesses as their civic duty. So they're looking at that how can I give back to the communities or local community while I'm in college and also prepare me for a career or a job as we go forward. I hope to see these students in positions in academia, in industry and in policy where they're putting forth an affirmative vision of human flourishing. How can we design technology to be built for collective public good? How can we build in the principles of responsible use into how things are being designed, used and deployed? Like that is my hope for all the students in Pitt UN today. Frequently when I meet people who don't do this kind of work, they go, oh, let's be really depressing. You know, you're working with Muslim communities that are being oppressed in immigrant communities that are being deported. But being able to leverage technology, being able to use the law, being able to do trainings and educate people, just even saying it now, it just warms my heart to be able to do that and to have some degree or some funding or some training and to be able to do that with communities. I just feel lucky. I think it's often assumed in technology circles that innovation means sacrificing someone or some community for the greater good. Pitt demands that we interrogate those assumptions, that we ask again and again, how are we defining innovation? If you leave with anything at all, is that equitable innovation is powered by and for people.