But if I can have a path to all the subsets, as well as to each of the individuals, that's a much larger number of connections, which means there's a much richer set of things. It means you can take a large community, pull aside little subgroups, and the subgroups can invent things that the whole group couldn't have done. And if you have many of these subgroups, you can do lots of interesting things. So Flickr is one of my favorite examples of this. There are obscure Flickr groups devoted to pretty much everything. So I have my, I'm using my Fuji X100 camera nowadays. It's quite old, but I like it. And there's a community for that. But within that community, there's a community for people who take black and white photos with the Fuji X100. And then there's probably a community for people who take black and white photos with the Fuji X100 in London. And then there's probably one for people who take photos of it like that in North London. And then in, you know, the eastern part of the North London. And then all these subgroups. And there's all these places where people can interact with the things you make. And all these potential conversations you could have. I think the idea of Reads' law is that there are, in a group forming a network, there's more value. And I think one of the mistakes we make is that we think of the internet and we say, this is the internet, it's got two, two point something billion people in it. There are two point something billion connections that can have. But then you look at all the subgroups. All of the, each site is its own little subgroup. And that's why the internet has grown in value so quickly compared to something like the phone or television. Because you could only do one to one or one to many. You couldn't reach subgroups. This is why I think the, you know, the kind of instant messaging stuff we're seeing have grown in value so quickly compared to television. And this is a really bold insight. And the implications of it, I don't, well, I don't even understand the implications. Yeah, it's very interesting. Even at a microscopic level, I'm thinking about even small tools that recently I, the team I'm on, we switched from Campfire to HipChat. And you'd be like, okay, well that's a group, they're both group chatting. It's fine, okay, people can join groups. But in one, I can spin up a very simple, small subset of chats. A team is working on a specific thing. But I don't have to go off into a separate tool to do it. I just, boop, I'm right in there. Or I don't have to go up and it's less complicated. So in HipChat, I can just select these people and I'm in a subgroup. And, but I can still have the main group there accessible. And, but in Campfire, I had to kind of go and it was a little bit more cumbersome. And, you know, I had to set up a completely different room. And I was trying to figure out why, once I showed it to everybody, they just immediately switched over. Every, the whole company within one hour was, everybody was over on the, on the new system. And completely just left the old one behind. And it was, the first thing I saw people using was subchats. Subchats, not having to spin up a separate group and, and having a developer channel. Just all of a sudden, the three developers were in our own little group. So we could talk without being noisy in, in the main group where we were sitting. Well, the thing is you already wanted to have these conversations in the past, but you didn't because they'd be noise to the whole community.