Alt dette er gjort mulig pga vår sponsor Signicat

Hva er SSI og digital identitet? Hva gjør vi ikke riktig i dag? Er dette spørsmål som gjør deg nysgjerrig, bli med oss i dag.

Bli kjent med de store identitetsinnovasjonene som skjer i Sverige og fremtidige tanker om hvordan vår digitale identitetsverden kan være! Lal fra iGrant vil dele sine tanker.

Denne episoden introduserer Lal og hans tidligere utfordringer med data og identitet, og vi går gjennom årene med arbeid som har gått inn i iGrant og Lal. Vi ender opp med noen spådommer og favorittidentitetsteknologier.

Linker

Lenke til iGrant: https://igrant.io/

Prøv demoene dems: https://igrant.io/datawallet.html

Knytt kontakt med Lal: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lalchandran/

Transkripsjon

[00:01] Snorre: Hi, and welcome to the Thin Identity podcast. Today we will visit Sweden and talk to the company. I Grant Lao. The CTO will share his thoughts about the current identity space we are in.

[00:31] Lal: Hello.

[00:32] Snorre: Hello.

[00:33] Lal: Hey, how are you?

[00:34] Snorre: I'm good. How about yourself?

[00:36] Lal: I'm pretty good.

[00:37] Snorre: Great. Glad you're here. I'm looking forward to our conversation.

[00:41] Lal: Awesome. Yeah. First of all, thank you so much for inviting me over. It's great to talk about these kind of things with people who are being in the field.

[00:52] Snorre: Absolutely. Let's get down to business. Why don't you tell me a little bit about yourself and the company working for and how you got there.

[01:02] Lal: Yeah, so my long history work in the telecom space, unlike a typical telecom engineer, I have a slightly different career path. I've only worked with new products pretty much my entire life and career. Started with network management systems, three G, four G, five G, then with the data warehousing, data mining, security, and then cloud, distributed cloud. So got introduced to distributed cloud. And over the course of these years, I've also been traveling between Finland and Sweden and got to a realization that even though these countries are very close to each other, it was almost impossible to carry your data or even to carry out transactions across the border. And I was sharing this kind of thought process with my Cofounder. Five years ago, and we were saying how cold it would be if I could actually really because I was filing returns in two countries, et cetera. And I was saying how cold it would be if there's a mechanism of really just upload your documents or upload your data and then they know that it's valid and so on. And I'm able to actually use just one app. I don't have to use one app and fill in and one app and kind of a thing. Yeah, so I was sharing that kind of thing, and then she got interested. And here we are five years from now. We have, I granted tell you, as a platform.

[02:27] Snorre: That's really cool. So it's a really nice journey of how you started, though. Comes from a very personal perspective, I guess.

[02:36] Lal: Yeah, absolutely. It's even more interesting because I was literally in that situation where I had to move my daughter's health data from Finland to Sweden, and I couldn't do it in a digital way at all because of the regulation. And that's why I was even angry about myself and angry about everything. Despite being in the right side of the world when it comes to digitalization, still, you could not get anything downloaded as a softer copy or anything like that because of law that prevented this from happening. And I was really like, how can that be the case?

[03:12] Snorre: Yeah, that's crazy. If you got to go on to the first question, what's your point of view of digital identity today? We are in a space where the Nordics have Bank ID, but you have struggled to be able to move data between two countries. What's your kind of main point of view of digital identity today?

[03:33] Lal: If you take a step back and really looking from a digitalization point of view, as I mentioned in the beginning, we are supposedly in a digitally very advanced, but then from a digital identity point of view, it's still pretty old fashioned, if I put it that way. So to me, advanced digital identification mechanism is fundamental to really enable digitalization to the full potential and to unlock, for example, the access to banking and all these services via similar kind of mechanisms. And you don't want to have multiple apps and multiple keys and multiple things, et cetera, at the same time. You don't want to have a single point of failure either. So how do you enable that kind of a mechanism? And for that, that is what I would call advanced digital identity system.

[04:37] Snorre: I have to give all honors to Bank ID. It's working really well, right?

[04:43] Lal: Absolutely.

[04:43] Snorre: And now they are able to use your fingerprint to just quickly get a notification and scan and be like, oh, you logged in, and then it's kind of working. But what do you feel, first of all, do you believe they will be able to jump on this third generation identity that's coming with EU, or would they kind of fall behind or be a starting point of trust? Where would you kind of put Bank ID in that direction?

[05:10] Lal: I think if you look at Bank ID, they've done extremely impressive work. They started sometime in 2003, and they come a very, very long way when it comes to really making it easy for citizens and, and and every every person who's actually consuming a digital service.

[05:33] Snorre: Yeah.

[05:35] Lal: So they they have really done a fantastic job from where they started off, I'll put it that way. And what is really perhaps missing is the interoperability and being able to actually use the same kind of mechanism in a global perspective or in a even beyond Sweden perspective. That's like the missing part. But then again, if you relook at it from the rest of the world perspective, nobody was there either. In a way, there's no system out there. At least today, there's no system out there where people could pretty much be seamlessly being the same system across Europe or across the world. So I'm rather confident that Bank ID recognizes this. The fact that they are already part of our EU wallet, concert, et cetera, tells me that they really is looking to bridge the gap. And I don't necessarily feel they're very behind if they want to really do.

[06:43] Snorre: It because they have the skills to manage a lot of security. Right?

[06:48] Lal: Absolutely. And look at the kind of transaction volume. It's huge, and it's very sensitive data or critical data, that they've actually the kind of challenge they've solved way back in the middle of early 2000s is like unbelievable. So the kind of maturity and the operational ability they've gained over a period of time is fundamental, I would say, for Swedish society, if not the whole European society to leverage on.

[07:19] Snorre: Absolutely. So you mentioned interruptability, I just want to touch upon that. Yes, there's no system that kind of interoperates. You had an attempt before, it didn't really work. But we have passports, right? And passwords have an electronic chip in it meaning that there has to exist and agreed upon electronic data model somewhere. Why is this not being spoken that much about in the space we are in?

[07:54] Lal: If you really look at the passport system it's unbelievable, right? At least all across Europe it's a common format. It's a common pretty much every passport supports NFC and you can actually verify the objectivity of a passport in a single tab and people are not really well aware of that whole fact. So today, for example, if I carry my passport and if somebody want to actually verify the authenticity of it or to check my credentials, they can do that already today. But one fundamental problem is like the scalability of such a solution and the costs associated with implementing that kind of solution in every system. For example, if you're talking about a country border systems it's not a big deal, they can manage. But if you want to really make it as a system of enterpoint for anybody in the physical and digital world the system is absolutely not scalable. That's where the issue is and it's very expensive.

[09:02] Snorre: Yeah so what makes it not scalable? Is it the sense that it's physical?

[09:11] Lal: I think it's down to having to verify, having to integrate the APIs and so on and that makes it extremely cumbersome. For example, if you really want to do a good job they need to have some kind of access to the set of authority in Sweden if they want to verify a Swedish passport and so on, which is okay. If you're talking about, again talking about a travel only scenario where they are checking it at the border then it's okay. But if you really want to have like can I log in with my passport kind of system that's not possible today. From a scalability point of view and from a cost point of view I wouldn't say not possible, I would say it's extremely cumbersome.

[10:01] Snorre: No, I agree with you but I got this question before can't we just take the passport data and make it into Verifiable Credential and everything would be great?

[10:12] Lal: We have done that by the way.

[10:14] Snorre: Yeah, cool. How did that go?

[10:16] Lal: Well, you can try it out yourself. So we have already demonstrated where if you have a passport that is supporting MSC without data wallets that you can download from Play store, app store you can copy the content, scan and copy the content, your picture and signature, et cetera, onto it while we actually copy what we are validating it. And then once you store it as a credential, you are part of a legend from point onwards. And then from that point onwards, the entire verification happens from the wallet towards any Verifiers who want to do it. So everybody who supports the SSI stack for example, can configure for these attributes and they can pretty much like for example, if they want to do age verification or a document signing where they want to use the actual signature from a passport, they can do that already today.

[11:14] Snorre: Yeah, that's cool. So that brings me up to a point that you brought up that you want to focus on use cases and value rather than tech. Basically. How has this use case created value in your guys'ecosystem?

[11:31] Lal: Yeah, I think if you really look at the last five or six years, there have been like a lot of activities in the tech space when it comes to the system development, tech development, standardization, et cetera. With all the SSI Verifiable credentials, et cetera, there have been quite a bit of work that has been done. What I believe is fundamentally the issue is the governance of the whole thing. If you are really talking adopting this kind of system to a particular use case, how do you govern such an infrastructure? How can we make this trustworthy end to end? That is one aspect. Second aspect is what kind of credentials are really declined? How can we really make these things seamlessly interoperable? So to me, if you want to really address these kind of issues, what is really needed is to lay out clear use cases and someone really making a choice that okay, we are going to go ahead and do this. Let me give you an example. So in Sweden, I don't know how it is in Norway, if you go to Systemalograph, which is like the state alcohol. So if you go there, they are today asking for your ID card when they sell you alcohol basically. Right?

[12:54] Snorre: Yeah.

[12:54] Lal: So what's happening is really that people are actually exposing all the data. And the same goes for, for example, if you're going to Pablo, something like that, or a nightclub for example. So these kind of use cases could easily be done with digital credentials without even really exchanging any data, just by having a zero knowledge proof kind of system where none of these companies really need to have any access to any data. At the same time, they can have a validity check, they can verify that you're a certain age and so on without having to consume the actual data itself. So those kind of systems are already there. The challenge is there is no clear incentives or willingness to really go ahead and implement this kind of system in real life in a way. So that's why I've been quite often educating the need to adopt or jump into certain use cases. Because once you jump into these use cases, you also understand the operational challenges of really scaling it up and you learn. So if you look at most of the Silicon Valley companies or Internet companies, they all build that systems by actually doing it. And they were actually realizing the scalable tissues themselves. They began to actually adopt and adapt new things all the time. And if that has to happen, we need to actually start implementing use cases.

[14:21] Snorre: Absolutely, I completely agree with you because the tech doesn't tell well enough story, because it's easy to make tech look nice, but when it's first in the hands of the world, it's going to be different. But you guys are able to consume passport data. Have you been able to put that into a use case yet or have you tested out with people?

[14:47] Lal: Yeah, unfortunately we have to limit that whole thing only to say onboarding situations and for age verifications because of the nature of our business and because we are positioning ourselves as what we call a data intermediation service. So we don't want to really provide an end service. So unless and until there's an application that really wants to check your age or check your data from a password verification point of view, it's not really out there yet. We did, of course, do trials. As I said, you can already check some of the trials that we have done for applications where, for example, there's an application in Sweden which verify the person if you're like a plumber or some kind of daily worker, for example, there are certain kind of application where people can actually demand on demand service requests, et cetera. For those kind of systems. This is extremely valuable. So they can guarantee that okay, the person actually is legal, having a work permit, et cetera. And unfortunately they haven't gone live yet with that system. But we do have it.

[16:09] Snorre: Yes. That's cool. That's cool to hear. I was just thinking like randomly ideating now saying that, hey, if the bank terminals wanted to support this, it would be the perfect kind of exchange point. When you tap it, you tap to pay, but you also tap to validate your ID, right?

[16:33] Lal: Absolutely.

[16:37] Snorre: The term says, well, you're not allowed to buy alcohol.

[16:40] Lal: Absolutely. Yeah. Basically when you enter into an alcohol shop, you could pretty much be tapping your ID card or your digital ID, your phone for example, with the NFC and you could be entering. And then when you're checking out, you just pay and check out in one single transaction. So that's already possible. Today it's more about the business case and the willingness for people to actually really look into these kind of use.

[17:11] Snorre: Cases and the things like how do you make a store go towards this really trickle. We have the story about digital Busar. They have this huge you know about this, right? They have done this huge store age verification project. Do you know what the business model behind or like the business mindset behind there? What was the driver for that possible change?

[17:44] Lal: Tell me about it.

[17:45] Snorre: So I was hoping you knew, but I'm going to tell you about the case that we can discuss about it. But Digital SAR has been able to talk to this convenience store organization which has about 180,000 convenience stores across the US. Yeah. And they went in with the SSI mindset and say, hey, we can do age verification a lot smoother and faster for you guys. And this has been tested and proven and trialed and been kind of talked about a lot. But I wonder what is the actual what was the pivotal point for that convenience store to say yes? Is it what you just mentioned? Like, hey, we can remove all people from the store. This was small convenience stores. It's not like Walmart or anything. We can remove all and people can age revocation themselves inside or what do you think the pivotal business is?

[18:45] Lal: Yeah, so that's a very interesting point that you're raising here. I think sometimes when I think this is also back to the bank he question you asked about. Right. Sometimes I feel that one reason why it's hard sell is because the systems over here are already advanced enough. For example, most of the access gates have keys that are issued separately already today, for example, if somebody actually want to get in, it's automated. So the moment you show yourself there's a sensor licensing system that actually sensors it and you are into it. So people haven't really probably identified it as a major problem. That like for example, queuing is not really considered a major problem.

[19:32] Snorre: No.

[19:33] Lal: So those are the kind of issues in this part of the land, of course being a country that is relatively small in size and of course, especially in Sweden, if you're talking about systemal argued there are system every 1 km in stock conflict. Of course sometimes on a Friday you do see a long queue but it's very seldom that you see people queuing up for a long time. And the system logic is really seeing this as a genuine issue.

[20:07] Snorre: I don't think this is ten blogger ever will have any issues because they are what do you call it?

[20:12] Lal: Yeah, exactly. I think that's another of course that's always the case. But still, even if you look at pubs and all right, I'm not really sure if they really see it as a real issue or a real problem. And I think for companies like us, we have started to be like an intermediation layer. So we haven't really gone ahead and implemented the application yet and that's largely because we were getting enough traction in that area. And then there was also a lot of regulatory changes that actually favored our model. So in a way, the way we are positioning ourselves is like a stripe or a clown for example. We don't want to be the end application.

[20:56] Snorre: Yeah, it completely makes sense. The question is then are there enough customers out there who understand like okay, you have a lot of normal identity intermediaries so don't you guys need any use cases to prove and tell them you should come with us and use us as an intermediary because it might be more efficient?

[21:20] Lal: Absolutely. See the thing is I can talk on our company per se from our company per se. The biggest challenge has been that we are still small. So if you want to really look into a new area and scale it up, it is a different kind of undertaking. So what we have done is really we found certain niches in health care and public sector and we decided to focus on that and get it working because we are fortunate enough of course to be supported and held by public sector and some of the health care entities over here in the Nordics. And so we thought the best approach is actually to make these kind of things robust and make it actually work cool from an end user experience point of view, et cetera. And once you do that, scaling it up to a particular application is not a big deal. So if somebody actually really have recognized SSI as like a great mechanism of really being able to do that in a scalable way, it doesn't take a lot of time for us to really support that kind of use case. So that is the strategic choice we made like two years ago and we are sticking to it even today.

[22:36] Snorre: Yeah, well, you guys have to make the wallet, right? You have to be the holder that brings along the data.

[22:44] Lal: Correct. And we, we also have the issue and we also provide say agents or wallets for every issue and verifiers and we have also created mechanics for anybody to deploy this kind of agents in any infrastructure they want from a single console. So that's what our business is all about.

[23:03] Snorre: Yeah, that's really cool. So we haven't been talking very high level about use cases and business. I want to dig a little bit into tech but I want to take it from the EU perspective. You mentioned that you guys are part of the consortium or not? The, but there's a couple of consortias, but you guys have been part of a big one, and why don't you kind of tell me a little bit about that and how you guys have made a plan for time frame and what kind of technology you guys might be looking at.

[23:36] Lal: Yeah, we are part of a consortium that is led by Swedish and Finnish governments and it's pretty much like almost 60 participating entities in total located pretty much all over Europe. The the project starting in May sorry, April, end of April and is going to run a little over 18 months project. And the beauty of the whole thing is that it's focusing on two or three very large scale pilots that will actually be rolled out and tried and tested on real life use cases such as for example, travel and payments for example, and so on. So it's very exciting to see that there's a good push and pull coming from different parts of Europe and there's also like an effort and funding that is available where companies such as ours can actually really use the opportunity to really showcase what we have already done today and what we are able to do with this kind of stack. The stack we have chosen today is largely the base stack is on Ares and Indie framework. Having said that, there are also projects within Sweden that is really also looking at EBSI as another track. So what the approach we have done taken as a company, that is ironic approach is that we support multiple trust anchors. So all these different, say Indie base ledgers or EBSI, et cetera, are trust anchors for us. And what we are providing is like a management system for companies to onboard, companies to issue, company to verify. And we create an environment for walls to be deployed supporting these multiple protocols.

[25:41] Snorre: So will this consortium, there's other people, other companies coming in, coming with different types of technologies, will there be a focus on interoperability or will there be a crash when it comes to meeting in this construction and kind of figure out what to do?

[26:00] Lal: I think one slight advantage we have when it comes to Ewc is that there's a slight consensus within the entities to look at Indie as like the base and then formulated architecture for the interoperable department. If you formulated architecture, as long as every company actually is adherent to that architecture and data schemas and standards that are laid out in the Interoperability work package, they should be able to demonstrate even though they are not really exactly using the same textile. And now back to your point about whether this is going to crash. I don't necessarily believe that is going to be the case at the same time when you're coming from a telecom space. So if you look at how telecom systems have developed over a period of time, if you're familiar with, for example, if you're, if you're being alive during the 2G times or two early 3G times, etc. To travel for example, from Europe to US, your phone doesn't work basically. I remember, yeah, in fact, in fact in the early days you even have to change your phone to a local phone, or you need to take the SIM card and so on. There are a lot of different drama that has played out and this is all down to your definition of crashing the interoperability coming to a halt. I would say the telecom architecture is like the first desertized architecture that actually made Interoperability possible to a global scale. So coming from that domain space and seeing how things have actually advanced in the data space, or the internet company space, or the over the top provider space, I think I would say five years down the line, it shouldn't really matter. And there are clear incentives for companies to actually make sure that they actually support multiple protocols.

[28:10] Snorre: Yeah do we need more research pilot projects on Interoperability or what's your point of that?

[28:18] Lal: Again, I think the focus should be more on real life use cases companies or entities adopting it. For example, can we have all universities across Europe deciding that we will issue digital credentials as evaluation certificates, for example, or school certificates for example, or skill certificates, for example, or health certificates for example. We already tried to canvas when the COVID was coming in, we tried to canvas the Swedish entities to adopt SSI as one of the mechanism of issuing Vaccination certificates. We failed and in fact the standards or the specs already supported it but people actually so there's a bit of hesitation to new things not to take risk, especially if you're like a public player understandably the incentive to take risk is much lower so I fully can empathize and sympathize with those decision making process. At the same time, I think it's about time that we are looking at really adopting these things and taking that risk of failure.

[29:33] Snorre: This EU project, you guys said it was 18 months, right? Yeah how does the world look after 18 months?

[29:44] Lal: Well, my hope is that there's a greater recognition of the standards and the technology stack out there. For me, 18 months is a good enough period for us to also try a large scale system between countries because as I was talking in the very beginning, even between Finland and Sweden, we can't exchange data that is completely verifiable. So those kinds of things are the awareness building is a starting point for in addition making. So I think 18 months from now I think that awareness within the government and the knowledge within the key decision making entities would result in a I would say better possibly a virgin and that's what my hope is in 18 months down the line.

[30:42] Snorre: Yeah your hope, what's your percentage of that?

[30:49] Lal: I think it's very clear to me that the kind of scale and this kind of opportunity out there if we actually enable a completely verifiable ecosystem of data transfer the kind of opportunity that will actually open up for me is like huge and it is inevitable that it's coming. It's just that sometimes people haven't even thought about the problem really as a problem. For example, today when you go abroad, you're carrying your passport, you're carrying your COVID certificate, you're carrying your boarding pass and everything, right? And you are actually showing your passport to a man or a woman in the check in counter and they are spending time trying to even look at it and read through it and so on. Right? It's a complete stupidity. I had a recent example. We were in Abu Dhabi, and we were in a queue in this hotel for almost half an hour because there was like a couple of receptionists, and they were checking every single passport, every single COVID certificate, every single and then I finally had to ask you, what are you really checking? The problem actually is that the world actually hasn't realized the stupidity sometimes that people are actually into. So it's people like us who actually need to step up and say that nobody ever in the world should actually do a job that way. You need to check or check and verify and sign off yourself. You should not be accountable for something that you cannot do.

[32:34] Snorre: That identity guard mechanism, human identity guard mechanism. I don't understand it because in reality, it's just this poor guy potentially making the wrong choice. And they shouldn't be liable to do that, not with the technology we have today. They should not be liable to have to do that.

[32:55] Lal: Right. Another aspect is also that one another reason is also that apart from like a handful of companies, right, the big techs have been, in my mind, have been rather okay. This might be a bit controversial in front of my privacy friends, et cetera, but they've been rather okay when it comes to ensuring that it's not really completely they've been reasonably okay in the way they've handled the data. In my mind at least, given the state where we are in, of course it could be much better, much improvable, and there's like potential concerns and blah, blah. But still, we have not really seen a massive complete breakdown of the system, apart from a handful of cases are on Facebook, for example. In a way, I would say 80% of the big tech saw tech companies and all who have actually been collecting massive amount of data has been reasonably well governed. So that's also another reason why so the self governance, yes, we know that fellow governance hasn't happened, but it has not been so bad that people actually felt threatened yet.

[34:16] Snorre: Absolutely.

[34:18] Lal: But at the same time, people understand, people are gaining understanding that, okay, that threat is real, going to be real. And we have seen that in some of the examples. So in my mind, transparency auditability, respecting individual privacy, et cetera, is getting traction. So five years down the line, if I may put it that way, protecting the digital rights transparency auditability would be fundamental for me. I think one of the aspect that I think will be fundamental is that any company that actually is exposing consuming data, they want to do it without having to worry about the complications of legality or complications of violating the digital rights of privacy, for example. So today, for example, if you look at, like. When I'm running an ecommerce shop, I safely integrate a planner or safely integrate a stripe. I don't have to really worry about whether am I going to get payment, am I going to be liable if there's any fraud, and so on. I don't have to worry about that, right?

[35:23] Snorre: No.

[35:23] Lal: That's also one reason why those kind of systems actually is successful. So I think that kind of movement actually is beginning to emerge in my mind, even in the data space.

[35:32] Snorre: Absolutely. Now I look forward to the day we have a gray login button or gray identify button or gray verify button. And it's just like I can choose whatever I want to get there. And the person creating the system can choose whatever extra tool he wants to support himself on. So they can choose the car now they can choose something for identification and just give him a great button and then we're off to a good start, right?

[36:05] Lal: Exactly.

[36:06] Snorre: Yeah. So I'm going to end with a couple of minor questions, just like tech, because I like to hear you guys said you were in Aries stack. What's your favorite protocol for Exchange? You have, like didcom Vcp oadc anyone? I might have forgotten. Is there any there you yeah, that's.

[36:29] Lal: Pretty much the stack we have. We did come with Erik's framework. We also support Oledc on top of it in addition to the Connection protocol. And for me, they've done quite a good job. And as I said in the very beginning, we do support multiple other protocols as well around EBSI, et cetera, and there are a bunch of other things. But I do think that one reason why I would really recommend, say, an Aip 10 with Bitcom, et cetera, is like, there are a lot of things, it's a maturity where it promotes privacy by design, features like data minimization. It actually enables Kpe, for example, and so on. And then last but not least, it's like the privacy is inbuilt in the protocol itself. And then what we have done on top of it is really to extend these protocols with compliance by design. The point I was trying to make earlier, when somebody actually on both Iran and get gain access to data, we guarantee that the data actually is authentic. We guarantee that the risk associated is very minimal and so on. So that's what I would say. The reasons why I would go for that sounds good.

[37:50] Snorre: And I have this question, like if you choose a credential container and you ask me what you mean about it, and there has been this I wouldn't call it war, but there is a branding war happening where you have Verifiable credentials and then you have Mdl, which is pushed by Apple in the US. Then you have the Acdc, which is more like niche. You probably have some more. You have JWT in general, just like straight up JWT, but they're not the same data containers, but not necessarily credentials. So what would you give your support to?

[38:33] Lal: I think being from the Europe and being closely working a lot with Verifiable credentials, I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be supporting that. And having said that, again, I want to be an enabler. I don't want to be stuck with technology. Even though I have a technology hat. I still believe that what we really want is a world which functions well and where people actually benefits from the whole thing and people actually can do things in a particular and legal manner. And from that point, I think we further credentials would be my choice.

[39:13] Snorre: Thank you for showing up. I hope you had a good conversation. I got a lot of good insight and information from you, which is really great.

[39:22] Lal: It was my pleasure and thank you so much. That's not right.

[39:25] Snorre: Thank you. So I hope to see you again at some events.

[39:30] Lal: Absolutely.

[39:31] Snorre: Thanks for listening to the Din podcast and keep on following us to find more great content with a Din Foundation to subscribe and get in touch with us if you want to join in for a conversation. Have a great day.