 Man, I'm starting to like using this DJI Pocket 2 because it's so small, so light, and so inconspicuous. I can walk around the street and nobody sees me compared to an iPhone. It's much bigger, much heavier, particularly when you're pairing it with a gimbal. So this is a gimbal that I'm talking to right now, and it's just so much easier to use in public. It's not nearly as embarrassing or anti-social. So anyway, thinking about further thought on communication industry and religion. So the artistic orientation used to spring from a religious and magical conception of the world. But starting in the 18th and 19th century, art has largely slipped the bounds of religion, but art used to come from the religious and the magical view of the world, but now it's slipped the bounds of religion. So the artistic impulse comes from a magical or religious orientation often. And it makes somewhat similar claims to the transcendent, to ultimate truth, to providing emotional reassurance, to meeting our most visceral emotional needs. But once an artistic medium, whether it's painting or movies or books, has freed itself from the particular constraints of a given religion, then becomes much more of a rival to religion than perhaps even science is likely to be. Because art deals, as religion deals, in emotion, from a secular perspective. The primary purpose of religion is to meet people's emotional needs. And in the modern world, art often meets people's emotional needs much more effectively than religion. Art like religion deals in meaningful communication. Art like religion deals in interpretation, evaluating, evoking responses and inviting the individual's participation in this whole complex process. Now science doesn't really do these things. So I think that the artistic impulse and the emotions that are met by exploring art are very similar to the emotions that used to be satiated by religion.