Yeah, so I talked about this quite a bit in my book, "The Space Economy." I talked to folks who are a lot more knowledgeable about this than I am. And one interview that I did was with Peter Marquez, he's head of Space Policy at Amazon. He worked through, I think, four previous administrations, advising the White House on space policy, was heavily involved in writing space policy and was the the brains behind the property resources act in space, really a powerhouse, right, that's been around and done a lot of really meaningful things on the regulatory front. He says that you look back at every major decision that was made in the US space program, and it was all geopolitical driven. Like all of it, like he says, that the US space program is very easy to understand once you unlock the secret code, and the secret code is political will, realpolitik, like that is it. And it's really interesting. I mean, we have a lot of really interesting examples in the book where, you know, the race to the moon, and when the US won the race and landed humans on the moon. And then Russia admitted defeat, we had a proliferation problem, like we didn't want all those rocket engineers and things like going off to Afghanistan and other places. And so we essentially created a white collar welfare program to sort of keep them all employed. And this sort of.... this explains the sudden involvement in the Mir Space Station and the International Space Station, and like this collaboration that continues on to this day. So it's a really interesting undercurrent for every major decision that has been made in space to date. And it continues to be with where we are currently. Like I said, you know, with that quote, it's this race for the ultimate high ground, that US and China are both racing to the moon, both want to set up a permanently crewed outpost, you know, set up infrastructure there to house people with a rotating crew, similar to what we do with the space station today, but on the surface of the moon, and there is limited real estate, like prime real estate on the South Pole. And the reason for that is because there are scarce resources on the moon, sunlight, the South Pole, like you can get access to 24 hour, well all day long sunlight. And also there's water ice that we know about, right? So the idea is to get there and set up camp there because there's resources that you can use: sunlight for power, you can harvest the water ice, you can split it into hydrogen and oxygen and use it for life support and fuel. So everyone wants to get there and set up camp, you know, land, use that lander as the first infrastructure on the moon to sort of deploy some solar panels and provide power to the payloads and the rovers that are there, to provide some connectivity, you know, a link back to earth so you can communicate with your robots and what's going on there, and then mobility and you start to work out from there, right. But there is, you know, thinking about the moon as an eighth continent, potentially full of resources and strategic vantage point, right? You can see why there's a lot of interest there. And so both the US and China are racing to get there as quickly as they can. And they're both going for the same place. So this is very interesting from a funding perspective, because Artemis is the key driver here, right? Like the lunar market, the lunar industry is still very nascent. And like most nascent industries, it's primarily government driven. Most of the money that's going here... like there are some commercial companies, and there are some commercial customers, there is some of that happening. But the reason why we're seeing so much development on the moon at the moment is because of NASA's Artemis program, and because they've committed billions of dollars to achieve this aim, right? Well, you see, like, NASA going to Congress to try and get funding is always a slog, it's always very difficult. And particularly in this US political climate, where they're making cuts across the board, and people don't want to fund Earth science and some other things, right. Like, it's really difficult for NASA to make the case for more funding to fund this type of activity. Meanwhile, the Space Force, relatively new, it's been around for a few years, their budget has now surpassed NASA for the first time this year. And in fact, NASA is going and has to argue for every penny that they get, you know, the Space Force goes out to NASA and says we'd like to request this amount of money, and Congress said, you know what, have an extra $2 billion: they gave him more than they asked for. And that's only going to increase going forward. And so that kind of, I think, speaks to... if you want to get funding for these types of activities, if you play the defense angle, and if you play the geopolitical angle, you know, that's an easier route to funding it has been historically and will continue to be.