and planned when all the forces of democracy, privatization, individuality, and all the unexpected things that happen organically pull in the opposite direction. I mean, I think I have to say yes, but that's sort of my prerogative as a first semester urban planning student. Like, if you, I've already given up on the field, then it may be too late for me. Um, I think the some healthy skepticism isn't uncalled for, I guess. I mean, it's, I don't know. I guess it's what is sort of resonant about IWRM and like the water nexus approach and like sort of science policy interfaces more broadly is the kind of potential to reimagine existing diplomatic regimes, but I don't know whether that actually will work in practice. So maybe it's just an intellectual exercise, but I think it's a useful intellectual exercise. Well, it's only useful if it inspires something in practice that can be done, right? It's not useful if it alludes to something in theory that can't be done in practice and everybody's just thwarted and can't achieve what they're supposed to or the ideal. And just to loop back around again to urban planning, nobody in urban planning teaches about comprehensive, planned cities anymore except as an intriguing historical artifact. Nobody would imagine that you would build a place according to a plan at time one and expect at time two a decade, two decades, a century later