 Sounds great. Anyway, thanks for your patience and thanks for being here. Thanks for still having the patience to listen to me at 3.45pm. I'll try to keep it as lively as possible. Can you hear me OK? Yeah. Great. So today, we are going to talk about open sourcing financial services. I know it sounds like an oxymoron, but the reality is that's not the case anymore. And I'd love to walk you through a little bit of our history and how we got here. And most importantly, why we're seeing what I'm hoping can be defined as a renaissance of open sourcing financial services. So I'm Gabriel Golumbra. I'm the executive director of FINAS, the Fintech Open Source Foundation. We are the umbrella foundation under the Linux Foundation for financial services. We joined about a year ago. This is the first time I see many of my colleagues in person, and this is my first talk after a long time. So forgive me if I'm a little rusty. I'm not sure what's the protocol anymore to look at people in their eyes, shake hands, and stuff like that. With FINAS, we have almost 50 members, and most importantly, over 50 projects, standard projects, software projects, and special interest groups. Apart from being a pretty logo slide, I'm very proud to have in our foundation, and of course members of the Linux Foundation, financial institutions, increasingly retail banks, software vendor, Fintech vendors, hopefully more and more, and of course, also our associate members. We are seeing a lot of power in helping existing consortia in the industry to embrace open source in the very same way we've done with individual institutions. But as I said, as an Open Source Foundation, we are focused on building projects and valuable projects, hopefully, for the industry and beyond. And so we're really happy to have now over 50 projects in our foundation. If you want to learn more, you probably are familiar with the concept of landscape in the Linux Foundation. So if you go to landscape.finas.org, you can have a look at the over 50 projects and special interest groups that we discussed. What we are experiencing, especially in the last two years, has been a pretty outstanding growth, not only in terms of members, but in terms of projects. We've now passed 50, and especially in terms of contributors, which is pretty unprecedented, if you think about contributions from banks and financial institutions have been pretty sparse, to say the least, in the last few decades. And so we have now reached, over time, over 1,000 contributors. And what I hope to walk you through today is really how we go here, and what are the macro trends that we're seeing in the industry that are motivating such a contribution. Before I go there, though, I think it's particularly important to understand that our contributions are largely coming from financial institutions. And that, again, I think it's something that is very new, until, even as a foundation, when we started in 2018, the very core of the contributions will come from vendors, will come from technology vendors, which are, of course, way more familiar with open source and open source contribution in particular. In 2020, eight out of 10 top contributors to Finnaz come from pretty well-known financial institutions like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Citi Deutsche Bank. And again, this is what makes us think that open source and open source contribution is here to stay in the industry. But it hasn't always been the case. You just need to go back eight years to find articles like this one being pretty much the norm. Some people would not trust open source. Some people would flat out say in this industry they hate open source. Now, I think it's fair to say that, apart from cultural reasons, open source was considered too big of a risk. And it's still, in large part of the industry, still considered too big of a risk. This is, again, an article from nine years ago. Not sure how many of you are familiar with this case, but there was a big lawsuit between Goldman Sachs and one of their developers that actually allegedly stole code and uploaded it to a subversion repository. Now, the defense was on the other side that this was largely open source code that was taken from the high-frequency trading platform of Goldman Sachs. But this was a big moment in the industry that, for whatever reason, associated open source to this notion of risk, to this notion of, again, even more than what culturally the industry had already as a very highly competitive industry, as a very regulated industry. This was one of those sort of objections that was generally brought up when, especially early in the days, we were discussing about open source contribution. But then somewhere, I would say middle of the last decade, 2014, 2015, things started to shift, kind of bringing back an example of Goldman Sachs. On the left side, I don't know how many of you are familiar with the platform called SecDB, the Securities Database. That's basically a platform that is used throughout Goldman Sachs to represent securities and providing API access to basically the whole firm on, again, instruments of the day trade. Well, this platform was widely regarded, that's the article on the left in 2013, was widely regarded as Goldman Sachs secret sauce. What was their competitive differentiator with respect to other firms that had a much more fragmented representation of their securities? Now, if you only fast forward four years, same publication, same platform, that was starting to be seen as a weakness. Why is that? Well, fundamentally, this is a fully proprietary platform based actually on a language. There is an internal language called slang for which there exists no talent out there. And so on one hand, the lack of talent in maintaining and evolving that platform was considered the weakness. But beyond that, other competitive institutions started building their own single dealer platforms on open source languages like Python, for example. And if you pair that with the vast ecosystem of AI and ML libraries that is built every day by the open source community on Python, well, then it's pretty clear how in just four years, the very same secret sauce was starting to be regarded as a liability in the industry, as a potential weakness moving forward. And so we've seen the industry starting dipping their toes in open source. And to be clear here, the industry has always consumed open source. They might tell you that they didn't, which actually opens up a whole different conversation on compliance and regulation. But what never happened or at least never happened to the extent that we're seeing it today was open source contribution. And so I would say mid last decade, we've seen, for example, the AMQP project, open source by JP Morgan with the help of our friends, Red Hat. We've seen Open Mama, actually, a project under the Linux Foundation who is now under Phinos, being open sourced by, again, JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank, and several of these firms. We've even seen examples of collaboration or creating foundations around open source that haven't been necessarily successful. The article on the top right, you don't see the name there, but it's an effort called Loadstone, which was really an effort between Deutsche Bank and HSBC to try an open source. Really, the capital markets infrastructure, the basics of the capital market infrastructure, in a way that they would basically disintermediate some of the vendors that are very much incumbent in the industry. Unfortunately, that approach didn't really work well. It wasn't set up as well as the Linux Foundation. It sets up governance and structure around a truly level playing field. But it was at least an attempt and an understanding that open source could be really a counterbalance for an industry that is very much dominated by incumbents. And then I'm particularly familiar with the example on bottom left. The Symphony Software Foundation, in fact, is the predecessor of Venus. It's the foundation that I had the honor to start running in December 2015. And that was actually a fair attempt at creating a chat collaboration platform that would be providing basically an infrastructure for banks and buy side and the sell side to really trade and very much the business is now based on chat. But if you think about the exchanges, that is not necessarily how it happens anymore. There is a lot of communications that happens over different media. Chat is really the backbone. Most of it happens in Bloomberg. And so 12 institutions kind of joined together to create an open source alternative to Bloomberg. Now, let's say that there were some good things around the Symphony Software Foundation, including creating the trust and the awareness that a foundation and new throat third party was needed to really disintermediate an industry that, again, is very, very culturally competitive, culturally risk averse. And so we think that's really the beginning of what we're seeing right now in terms of active contribution from financial institutions. I want to stop for a second to analyze some of the trends and the reasons why we're seeing beyond the talent aspect that we discussed. Why are we seeing financial institutions taking the leap into open source? First of all, if you're familiar with how the industry has been going the last 10 years, now 12 years since the crisis in 2008, certainly the margins have been shrinking, both in terms of the top line. I don't have my presenter notes in front of me, but over the last 10 years, the revenue of the top 12 investment banks went down. I don't remember what was the number, but it's basically like JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs disappeared in terms of how much the revenue is being threatened by, of course, ETFs and other electronic trading instruments. On the flip side, the bottom line, after Dodd-Frank and the regulation in 2009, there has been a huge amount of increased spend, I think 30%, 40% growth in terms of the regulatory spend of these institutions. And so there's simply not as much money to throw at technology problems as there used to be 10, 15 years ago. And so I think this is one fundamental aspect as to why we're seeing firms looking for more and more efficient ways of innovating in their technology organizations. The second undeniable factor is what you would refer to as the democratization of the industry, which is still at the very beginning. But if you pair the fintech wave and the amount of investment that is going into smaller, vertically focused, customer-centric focused ventures, as well as the decentralized ecosystem, we have our sister foundation Hyperledger, who has really made a huge impact into the growth of that ecosystem. Well, then that clearly threatens the very definition of what it means to be a financial institution. And so while, of course, there's been a lot of reluctance to embrace this world, there's also the clear awareness that something has to change in the way these institutions run their business and, of course, run their technology stacks. And, of course, number three, I think it's pretty obvious by now, most of financial institutions consider themselves technology companies or want to be technology companies. I think there's still a fair road ahead there. But they are undeniably very technology-centric. This is a pretty much fully digital business at this point. And so the move to cloud, all of the organizations are going through cloud, the fight for talent between East Coast and West Coast. I mean, there is this interesting hate and love relationship between the East Coast and the West Coast, whereby on one hand, banks are angry at the West Coast for stealing their business. But on the other hand, they keep on trying to imitate them and taking executives on a daily basis from Amazon, Google, Microsoft. And so whether this is, definitely I'm not saying that this is a process that is complete, but it's certainly a process that is driving a more and more mind share. And open source in my mind is one of the sort of least kept secrets of the West Coast in terms of how they continue gaining a competitive advantage with respect to financial institutions. And so in 2018, based on what we had created through the Symphony Software Foundation, first and foremost, the trust among these financial institutions, we realized that there was, the timing was right to launch an entity that became FinNOS, the FinTech Open Source Foundation, that could really become the steward for open source collaboration in financial services. Now, let alone that it's not a platform, it's a foundation, but that's what you got from press. And you're going to take it, since it's on Forbes. And that was really the beginning of what we know today as FinNOS. I'm not going to go through the whole history. I think you guys haven't heard enough presentations today. So I'm not going to go through the whole busy slide here. But what I want to highlight around the history is we started really with 12 major financial institutions with the goal of enabling them to do open source. And so in the first couple of years, contributions were mostly from vendors. The banks were simply not ready to contribute to open source. I mean, I don't know how many of you work in financial institutions, but a developer at Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan could not access GitHub in 2018. It's almost like when I was a consultant and I couldn't access Google at my customers. It was pretty much useless. Then in 2000, so the first two years were really about enabling open source readiness. And we'll talk a bit more about that in the next slides. But what really changed with the major switch happened in 2020. And I think you probably heard this line before, but the pandemic has provided some degree of digital acceleration to this industry. Certain trends that were already started, as we saw earlier in this decade, definitely accelerated, including, for example, I can now use Zoom in my meetings with banks, which was, I had to use Webex for several years. Again, nothing against Webex, but it's good to be able to sort of adopt new technologies. And I think in the same way banks got more comfortable with remote working, we were very well positioned as a naturally distributed community to show them how it's possible to be productive in a technology organization while working in a completely distributed remote way. And so in 2020, we started seeing this uptick of contributions from institutions that, frankly, hadn't done much of that before. We've seen Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Starley, Deutsche Bank, and Citi contributing years and years of intellectual property, and not only so, starting to work in an open source first way. And I'm going to come back to that as to what that means. Now, before we go into a couple of these examples, a couple of these projects that we have the honor to host in Phoenix, I just want to kind of manage expectations here. This year, in partnership with the fantastic team at the Linux Foundation Research and some of our partners, we pro GitHub and ScottLogic. We've ran our inaugural state of open source and financial services survey. We really want to create a baseline in terms of where the industry stands. Of course, we have qualitative information having been in there for a while now. But it's always, I'm a number guy. I'm a data guy. And we want to create a baseline as to where the industry is when it comes to consumption, contribution, culture, and just really readiness of the industry to collaborate in the open. The reason why I bring this up here, and I'll show you a couple of slides, is, yes, there is clearly a much stronger realization of what the benefits of open source are for the industry. We'll talk about those. But we're still far away and certainly lagging other industries when it comes to policy, when it comes to the corporate structure and the really ownership of open source within these organizations. And this is not surprising, but I guess it's really good to have hard data on it that we can work and improve over the next years. Particularly, I think, again, this is something that just a few years ago, having had to sort of pitch to several of these institutions, it wasn't well understood that innovation, time to market, reduced total cost of ownership, talent retention, were top motivators for any technology-centric company to really engage in open source. And now, if you look at this data, again, this is a sneak peek to a survey that is going to be released next week, over 75%, 80% of the respondents of this survey, and this was over 300 respondents, a pretty good sample across the industry, do understand the value of open source. And again, that's a big thing from what we were even five years ago, where open source was mostly considered a risk. And the industry is starting to structure for it. I know this might be a little small to read, but this is showing how many of our respondents had consumption of policies within their organization for consuming open source. And among sort of different degrees of completion, completeness, over 70% of the respondents have a policy for consumption. Again, this is something that even a few years ago was probably not as clear. When it comes to having an OSPO, not surprisingly, the industry still probably only one of three respondents has a formal OSPO. That said, I have personally seen five to 10 large institutions this year hiring an open source program office lead to a certain degree, not extremely senior, but quite senior organization, sort of quite senior leader to structure their open source program. And so again, in terms of managing expectations, there's still a long way to go. Several of our respondents, I would say still the majority, still see a fear of lacking intellectual property, legal licensing concerns, clear lack of ROI as reasons for not fully enabling a firm-wide open source contribution policy. And so again, I think this reinforces very much the work we've been doing over the last few years, shameless plug here, around open source readiness. We're super excited to have five-plus financial institutions actively contributing to the foundation. On the other hand, there's still a long tail of institution, as we've just discussed, that still either don't value open source, the strategic value that we think you should have in such technology-centric companies, still don't have internal policies, or still sort of leave of a cultural background that is still very much brisk averse and there's still very much siloed. And so we continue to run in-finance, now in partnership with the Linux Foundation, with the Tudu Group, and the several other initiatives around this area that exist in the LF ecosystem, what we call our open source readiness program. We're really working to get banks to the place they should be to be able to contribute to open source. And with the realization that there is something particular about this industry when it comes to regulatory requirements, regulatory concerns, before they're ready to sort of prime time. Now, the reason why we continue investing in open source readiness is really because we have seen firms gain more and more value from open source as they increase their open source maturity. So unsurprisingly, when we started, most of our projects were very much focused on the technology organization. For the values, for the sort of value proposition that you probably are very familiar with, whether it is talent acquisition or retention, whether it is efficiency through mutualization of common technology, whether it is de-risking the investment on a commercial open source vendor. And so the earlier projects and some of our special interest groups continue to evolve in that direction. Open source readiness, DevOps mutualization, cloud service certification, inner source. There's a lot of sort of practice that I think we think in this institution, it's still lagging what probably you guys are used to. And the open source community at large is used to. But especially over the last two years, we have seen that those firms who have a much clearer understanding of the strategic value of open source and have at least started the journey of structuring their internal organizations to be able to allow developers to not only consume but contribute to open source projects, are now realizing that there is power in open source collaboration beyond code, driven directly by business needs, whether it is a faster interaction with their clients and a better, more efficient interaction with their clients. I'm thinking banks and wealth management, whether it is a better collaboration with regulators. A big part, a big initiative for us is what we call open REC tech. We'll talk about it in a little bit. Whether it is, again, just collaborating with their peers in sort of uncommon industry challenges, even basic data standardization, it's been a huge issue. If you think about it, this is an industry that by nature needs to interact with each other. They're trading on the same instruments and they need to report to the regulators sort of on common requirements. So it's an industry that at least in principle has a lot to gain through open source. And then finally, again, this is probably, I'll count the firms on sort of one hand probably, but we are seeing some of those really starting to see open source as a strategic pillar of their technology strategy. And in a way, becoming more and more akin to financial, sort of to technology organizations, to big tech. We're seeing more and more platforms being rolled out and I'm a personal believer that platform goes very well hand in hand with open source. Open APIs, open standards, SDKs for your developers that you want to maximize usage of and therefore open source really works well as a companion if you're trying to sort of do a platform play. So once again, another validation of why we continue to invest in open source maturity of this industry. Now, the last 10, 15 minutes, just a quick overview of how we do this and some of the key projects that we've seen these banks collaborating on. It's pretty similar to, I think any foundation under DLF. We have infrastructure. We have a very structured and proven to be successful software and standards governance. We talked about the open source readiness initiative and then I think one kind of realization is that we need to do maybe a little bit more work ourself as a team than in more mature open source communities and so together with our member success really trying to make our member realize the value of open source. We have a lot of focus on project success. We'll probably gain a bit more hands-on than for example, a Linux kernel development community as a team. Now, I wanna show you a couple of the projects that we've received over the last years. Very much all the projects that you see here minus one have been contributed by financial institutions. Perspective was contributed by JP Morgan in 2019. Walt was contributed by Deutsche Bank in 2020. Legend, it's our biggest project contributed by Goldman Sachs this year. Sorry, last year. Morpher comes from Morgan Stanley. Again, last year, 2020. Cloud service certification is JP Morgan. FDC3 is the one project that was contributed by a vendor but is now used by several financial institutions. And again, Plexus, Deutsche Bank. So again, just to show we think that there is power in end user driven open source communities and we continue to invest in fostering banks to open source intellectual property and to hopefully build on each other's achievements. I wanna touch quickly on Legend which is by far the largest project that we have. This is a logical modeling visual, logical modeling platform. Open Source by Goldman Sachs in 2020. It has an underlying language. It has a visual editor. And not only have we seen other financial institutions now adopting it and using it internally but we as a foundation are actually hosting this platform and we are inviting business folks to directly collaborate in the open. And so kind of going back to the technology organization and the business level value. It's not only about your typical mutualization of open source, say yes. Goldman Sachs has open source this platform. By the way, deployed on Maven Central on Docker Hub. This is open first. Goldman Sachs, this is not a dump and run to be clear. Goldman Sachs deleted their branches internally so they are really consuming from the open and we're seeing contributions now coming from other institutions. But I think the interesting bit is we've also seen by the means of hosting it in Finos, we have been able to invite business folks to collaborate directly on the platform with the output of collaboration being a data model. A standardized data model that can be used across the organizations and potentially can be used with regulators for the regulatory reporting. And in fact, that's why we're also investing in our relationship with regulators. So I think this is a really powerful platform. Love for you to try it. Again, you don't even have to download it. If you go to legend.finos.orgslashstudio, we'd be happy to provision access to it as long as you have a CLA. The other project kind of going on the other end of the spectrum, a standard project. FDC3 stands for financial desktop collaboration and connectivity consortium. I realize it's a bit of a mouthful. But it was, if you're familiar with how traders work with their like five screens and 50 applications running, well, this is the standard that is trying to create a common connective tissue for these apps to interoperate with each other and interoperate with the underlying desktop environment that they're running on. It was originally open sourced by a vendor and now we're working to have financial institutions define what the use cases are for the next version of the standard. Once again, very much end user driven. I think a testament to it is that I'm actually able to show those logos out there. It's not that easy to get a logo from financial institutions, even though they're all using them, but having them on the record and being able to promote the fact that they've been using it, it's pretty big. I think CT has come to one of our meetings telling us that they use it for about 900 applications internally. So pretty mature and we hope valuable project moving forward. We talked about ROI quickly before and some concerns that there are still in the industry around ROI. Perspective is a real time visualization library, open source by JP Morgan, over a thousand starts on GitHub, so truly open source project. These are the numbers that were shared by one of our platinum members about two years ago in terms of the savings and efficiency and ROI that they got by using this software. Now, I realize it's a pretty high level, it's a pretty rough set of metrics. We could spend probably a whole other hour session on discussing the ROI of open source, but I think it's pretty powerful again to see a financial institution, which shall rename unnamed, sharing the over $3 million savings that they had by using this library. I'm not gonna spend too much time or at least some time for questions in terms of our special interest groups, but again, this is a concept that actually we didn't have until we joined the Linux Foundation. We realized that there is room for basically coalescing common interests in our foundation whereby maybe certain organization are not ready to contribute code or to work directly on an open source project, but they certainly have common challenges, whether it comes to, again, open source readiness or mutualizing or conjugating the notion of DevOps in a regulated industry or working together on common regulatory implementation. The hope is, of course, that the special interest groups will spawn off into actual open source projects and open standards, not just remain talking groups, but that's really something that we launched October last year, and we've had already five being started and being pretty lively. The one that I am personally most excited about is our OpenRectec. Now, in principle, mutualizing open source regulation seems like an obvious concept, meaning when we collaborate in the open, we collaborate on areas where the requirements are common across multiple parties, and regulation sort of tick that box. We typically collaborate on areas where there could be some cost savings by collaborating, and as we discussed before, the cost of regulatory implementation for these institutions has become huge over the last years. Think about MIFIP too. So where we started was really to try and enable banks to mutualize regulatory implementations. Now, there is the hope that maybe when my grandkids grow up, we could have also the regulators themselves produce machine-readable open source regulation. But again, I wanna manage expectations here, and I have to wait for my grandkids to grow. That said, we've had really good engagement from regulators, like the financial institutions there also on a spectrum, I'm not saying the spectrum, on a spectrum of maturity when it comes to open source. Some are really familiar, some they have their own GitHub organizations, some others, we had to restart the conversation from what is a computer. But this is an area where we expect to continue investing in the next years, and we see a lot of potential to really become indispensable in the industry. One of the projects that is really related to mutualizing regulation is our cloud service certification project. The goal is to really have a truly open source framework for proving compliance to financial regulation when it comes to cloud deployments. We are working on a partnership with another organization called CDMC, Cloud Data Management Capability. But in the meanwhile, I exhort you to take a look at our cloud service certification project. We have JP Morgan, Deutsche Bank, and several vendors already working on it. Again, with the idea of this is a journey that every financial institution is undergoing, and there's no reason why each institution should be doing their own financial regulation implementation when it comes to cloud. And we certainly could use the help of technologists who are very familiar from tech companies with these issues, and have clearly invested interest there. Now, just to, as I wrap, there's much more to open sourcing financial services. In Phoenix, we've had one new project contributed every month this year, but admittedly, there's much more than this. Only this year, we've seen, if you're familiar with Move, it's an open source, basically embedded finance platform, truly open source with the building blocks being completely open. I just came across two weeks ago to Game Stunk Terminal, I don't know if you guys are familiar, is an alternative to Bloomberg that really came out with the frenzy of GameStop, and the democratization of retail investors. So it's really lively space, and we think that there's a major opportunity at the crossroads of open source and fintech. So looking forward, and hopefully I can leave a couple of minutes for questions. These are our themes for next year. We continue to enable these firms to become tech companies, leapfrog into tech companies if they need be, cloud and open source readiness, and finally, the developer centricity that we're seeing in the industry. I have to say I've had the luck of always working in open source, and when five years ago I understood how the developer experience of certain developers within some institutions, you know, I took it personally, I took it at heart. I think there is a liberatory aspect to open source in the industry. Ecosystem interoperability, API and data standards, we talked about legend that continues to be a cornerstone for us, and in the way we work with regulators, and certainly the business of open source. We're seeing more and more business-driven initiatives. Ultimately open source, it's a collaboration model that goes way beyond code, and I think we're finally sort of cracking that knot when it comes to financial services. Because ultimately, whether you are a financial institution, whether you're a tech or a fintech vendor, whether you're a regulator or an individual, we think there are clear advantages for you and ultimately for the ecosystem. Open source in financial services is a positive sum game. I'm gonna skip the build here and just do a final shameless plug. We are back in person. This is my first conference as I said after a year and a half, so forgive me if I was a little rusty. But our conference, the Open Source Strategy Forum, powered by the Linux Foundation, is coming back in person. Not sure you're gonna be able to be in London next week. I will, or in New York, hopefully, in a month from now. But this is the sole conference for open source in financial services, and I'm so excited to get back to seeing our community in person. OpenSourceStrategyForum.org, I hope to see you there. And with that, I am done. Is there any question? I know I spoke a lot and we are at the end of the day, so I won't be offended. Got the guy back there. That's a really good question. I would say there are, as I said, two or three companies that I can think are already in that stage, and I think it's a combination of, one, they are generally a little bit more nimble than some others. For example, I think that's a really good question. I think that's a really good question. I would say there are, as I said, two or three companies that I can think are already in that stage, and some others, for example, well, let's just be kosher here, but they are generally smaller than some of the bigger ones, especially some of those are, for example, just investment banking versus investment banking plus retail, and when they are, even when you are talking, say, 20,000 people versus 100,000 people, makes a big difference in the way they can move. I think, secondly, they have embraced this process much earlier than others, maybe 10, 15 years ago. I do think that open source readiness and what we've done helped, but it cannot be the sole driver. I think there is an executive leadership that has a much clearer idea of why open source, at least from my perspective, stands pretty much like cloud, should be a technology pillar for their sort of overall technology strategy. That would be, so I think size, executive leadership, and just, to an extent, culture. So the executive leadership enables the culture to evolve faster, I would say. Any other question? Please. Is how do you see this being driven by the development team or is it just for you to see this? It's a really good question. I would say when we started, about five years ago, I constantly got questions from developers saying, please help us to talk with our lawyers. Please, they just talk a different language. Can you help us sort of mediate the conversation that, I mean, five years ago, I mean, still, but five years ago, GPL was not a word that you could say in any of these conversations. Now, it still sort of raises some hair or some feathers, rough some feathers, but you can have an open mature conversation about licenses without everyone sort of freaking out with their hair on fire and living in the room. But so I would say it started developer driven. It started sort of bottoms up. Two or three years ago, even five maybe, talent, like the quest for talent and just the, you know, I don't have infinite amount of money to throw at technology problems, really help the conversation with executives. So it was developers. I think then we gained support of the executives. The hardest part still remains the frozen middle, like those 20 layers in between maybe the individual developers and the executive, whereby the skew between sort of cost benefit or risk and reward, it's still very much skew towards sort of being risk averse. Like why would I risk to put this piece of code out there when I don't have yet a direct incentive from my boss or sort of a company mandate to do so. So that I would say still originally driven by the technology organization, developer first executives, and now we're trying to tackle sort of the frozen middle more from the business side of the house because that has to sort of fundamentally change their incentive model. Does that make sense? You're welcome. Any other question? I think of course, they're being so nimble and they're doing the whole industry. Are these big guys trying to find, they can't change so easily. They're not going to go over so that they can see the future coming and they can't change what. Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting question. I would love also Daniela's opinion here from Hyperledger, but I would say it's still a hate and love relationship from where I sit, meaning there is this sort of curiosity and understanding that they can't just ignore this whole movement, whether it is the fintech, broadly the fintech movement, or even further sort of the decentralized DLT crypto space. But at least from my perspective, it's been really hard to see them like taking a substantial leap into bringing those technologies into production. There's pilots right and left, especially when it comes to DLT. There's investments in several fintech companies. I think they still see it more as a VC-backed or VC-type activity where they invest in different companies, but I don't know that I've seen sort of a full strategy to how do we evolve our business into that or how do we prevent us from being ran out of business. Again, there's plenty of attempts. One of my grievances, especially with fintech, maybe less with DLT is I have the fear that we're moving from a centralized mass to a decentralized mass. Like right now we have a centralized mass of heavily siloed stacks where each one has his own ledger and each one has to reconcile at the end of the day and there's clearing and the settlement and maybe because I'm used to instant payments in Europe, I kind of still get a little peaved by needing to wait 72 hours to send money here in the US to someone, but I also see all this sort of very vertically focused fintechs coming up with their own, they're perfect on one specific use case, but there's no data standard, there's no common APIs, so we're kind of moving to a different scenario which ultimately I'm not sure if it's gonna be incredibly better unless I hope open source and open standards can sort of bring it together. So I think to your question, the jury's still out from my perspective, whether they're more trying to stop that movement or whether they're trying to, I think in the last couple of years I've seen much more sort of positive signs of integrating and evolving their business. I think one final point is it's for what I've learned is much easier for them to adopt these new technologies on a new use case versus ripping off a legacy of 20, 30 years where again, it might just be no worth, it might be very risky to change a completely sort of established business process and organization. And so I think where there is potential is on really new use cases and new regulatory requirements and something that is net new, then I see a lot of potential to sort of work through a fintech or work through DLT and hopefully evolve incrementally if that makes sense. That's a really good question. I mean, I think there are one of the areas where we are investing a lot is open rectangle because I think regulation and regulators have to play a key role in innovating the industry and not just sort of potentially slowing down change but especially I'm less familiar with Asia. We have less Asia members although I know they're doing amazing work, especially with the Monetary Authority of Singapore in the payment space. Again, I think there are better qualified folks than me to speak to that. But when it comes to Europe and the US, I think for better and for worse, European regulators are a bit more empowered to impose change. Again, whether it comes of course with other side effects but I do think that having international standards that apply to everyone does indeed help this process. And so I think in the US, it's still very much left to the private sector to innovate and sometimes the incentives of the private sector might not always be fully aligned with sort of macro systemic improvement. And so again, I think it's, we're getting into sort of political conversations here ultimately but I do think that there is an advantage, maybe because I'm European as you can hear from my accent but there is an advantage of having regulators that can help setting standards and hopefully we can implement them in the open so that they don't become too much of a burden. Ultimately, there is a third way between regulation and the regulation and we hope open source regulation is that. Any final questions? I'm getting a nagging, so I think, thank you. Please, Daniela. Yep. Yep. Yep, you're welcome. Yes. Yes. That is amazing. Thank you, Daniela. I really appreciate the feedback. Thank you, everyone.