Wrong Place at the Wrong Time
When bad luck befalls us, we often say, “wrong place, wrong time.” Rather than accepting that our daily choices continually expose us to new and ever-changing risks, we tend to view life events in terms of good and bad luck. But to what extent are we in control of our own fortunes and can we find solace in the aphorism, “you make your own luck”?
In this week’s podcast, we discuss the virtues of luck and circumstance by exploring the relationship between risk and good fortune. Is the measure of one’s luck simply moderated by our appetite for risk? Why do we only bemoan our luck once we turn out to be unlucky? And are our perceptions of good and bad luck shaped by our morality and values? We learn where in the world you are most likely to be struck by lightning, ponder the validity of imposing a tax on mountain-climbers and share some of our own experiences of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
For more information on Aleph Insights visit our website https://alephinsights.com or to get in touch about our podcast email podcast@alephinsights.com
Transcript
Hello and welcome to the Cognitive Engineering Podcast produced by me, Fraser McGruer for Aleph Insights. In this series of podcasts we take a look at interesting topics and discuss what we think they tell us about analysis and decision making. I'm here with Nick Hare and Chris Wragg of Aleph Insights and this week we'll be discussing being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nick, you're in the right place at the right time at the moment. Can we, yeah, or I'm in the wrong place but the right time or, yeah, go on Nick.
Speaker B:It's definitely always the wrong time if it's before midday. So Alaska, the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge. A couple of campers there in June attacked by a bear. Okay. Now they did have bear spray and an air horn with them but they didn't have a chance to deploy them in time. I don't think either of them were killed. I think they were injured by the bear but they were evacuated in one piece. Anyway, Jeff Sellinger said there's no indication they did anything to prompt the attack or did anything wrong. But they were in Alaska. He said it's one of those where you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Right. And this is a phrase that gets wheeled out, isn't it, whenever anyone suffers what looks like just terribly bad luck. Yeah. And I've always found it slightly peculiar because I sort of think, well, it wouldn't matter if it was the right place as long as it was one or the wrong place or the wrong time. Yeah, one or the other. Like, you know, exactly. But, you know, the point is they wouldn't have been attacked by a bear if they'd been at home watching the TV, I assume. You know, so I think, you know, there's clearly choices they made that exposed them to the risk of a bear attack. And so, yeah, the question is, to what extent is that bad luck? Is it meaningful to talk about that being bad luck? And to what extent is that? And in general, to what extent do we control bad luck? Do we make our own luck? Sure. Okay. As people often claim.
Speaker A:And also, I mean, picking up on Chris's point, this is a rather anthropocentric way of looking at this. From the bear's point of view, he was in the right place at the right time, or maybe just the right place. Absolutely. You know, delicious pair of humans to cobble up. Yeah, exactly. To nibble on. Yeah. And, you know, did the bear make his luck that day? Or, quite ostensibly, all the bear's doing was just wandering around Alaska as he should be. Unlike Peter.
Speaker B:Yeah, but even if that bear is currently recording a podcast for other bears, he's still going to be pondering the same question. To what extent did I make my good luck?
Speaker C:Exactly. Well, I think it usually does turn out badly for the bear as well, because I think they usually go and find the ones that are involved in sort of random human attacks.
Speaker B:And give them a telling off. And give them a stern telling off. I thought they don't do that anymore. I think the practice these days is to just accept that that's bear-type behavior and not something we should be clamping down on.
Speaker A:But kind of returning to your point then, I mean, are we talking about luck here? Are we talking about bad luck? Are we talking about the extent that you make your own, to what extent you make your own luck or not? Because as you rightly point out, I mean, these people decided to go off to Alaska. If they had not done that and just stayed at home watching telly, you know, they would have been fine. But that leads to other sorts of logical sort of conclusions as well. But Chris, do you want to wade in?
Speaker C:Well, yeah. So I think the issue here is not about the extent to which you can or can't reduce your risk of certain things. Because obviously, you can reduce your risk of a bear attack, right, by not being in a place where bears live for a start. But the question is the extent to which when you should consider that your behavior needs to change in order to reduce risk. So for example, you wouldn't go and stand in the middle of a motorway, right, because you'd put yourself at a much higher risk of traffic accident. But you wouldn't say, okay, well, I'm never going to cross a road again, right? And so the question is, when do you put yourself at too much risk? And also, what risks are not worth even thinking about reducing? You know, how do you make that decision? So, you know, the classic example is lightning strikes, right? You know, people think of those as very, very rare events. They are rare events. But you could potentially moderate your behavior to avoid lightning strikes, right? So apparently, 70% of lightning strikes occur in the tropics. There are places where, you know, there's a place called Lake Maracaibo in Venezuela, which has basically 232 lightning strikes per year per square kilometer, which is about, yeah, about 100 times higher than the global average. So, you know, and obviously, lightning strikes take place at certain, more likely to occur at certain times of year. But people don't necessarily think, okay, well, I'm never going to visit the tropics, because I'm more likely to get struck by lightning in the tropics. But they might decide, well, I'm not going to go out onto Lake Maracaibo fishing in the middle of a lightning storm, right? So where, you know, yes, you can reduce your risk of a bear attack. Like if you walked into the bear's cave, prodded it in the nose with a stick, you know, and called it nasty names, then you would obviously say you weren't in the wrong place at the wrong time, you're being stupid, right? But if you're walking around a wilderness where bears do live, but they're not, you know, cheek by jowl, then you've- It's not rammed to the gunwales with bears.
Speaker B:It's not rammed to the gunwales with bears. You haven't got to be walking over bears to get
Speaker C:anywhere. So I think there's something about the sort of the overall risk of the event at which you're in the wrong place for the wrong time. So with lightning, for example, the stats I've been able to get are mainly US stats, and they are very focused on sort of, you know, lightning risks. But there are, the average number of deaths reported per year is about 27 from lightning strikes. And do you know what percentage of people die from lightning strikes?
Speaker B:What, you mean if they get struck? If you get struck, yes. I would imagine it's very low. So you've got to kind of make it into that fairly elite club to begin with. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Oh, oh. I'm going to say- Go on.
Speaker A:Well, I was going to say 5%. There's a but here, but keep going. Yeah, 5%.
Speaker B:Yeah, I actually don't have a strong instinct. Although I have seen- I'm going to say 1 in 5 instead.
Speaker C:It's about 1 in 10, right? Which I thought was low. I assumed like you got hit by lightning, and it was kind of 50-50. I thought the survivors were the exception. But apparently it's a 1 in 10 chance.
Speaker A:As an aside, by the way, very, very traumatic event to happen in one's life. And also, it has all sorts of implications that are not completely understood when you get struck by lightning. So those 90%, you think, great, they just go off and have a great story to tell. Yeah. No. But anyway. Yeah, no, definitely.
Speaker B:Injuries aren't fun, you know. You always sort of hear about the number of people killed in World War II. And then you hear some vastly bigger number were injured. And you think, well, that's all right, isn't it? But actually being injured in a war or by lightning strike isn't great.
Speaker C:No, no, it's not. It's not a win. But it probably beats dying on balance. Better than the alternative probably, yeah. Depends. But anyway, so there are apparently about 250-300 lightning casualties, reported lightning casualties in the US per year. So your chances of being struck by lightning are about one in a million, right? And I, you know, the only moderated behavior I've seen, I coached football out in soccer out in America one summer. And they did have a much more, what I felt was paranoid at the time view of lightning. As soon as it started raining and got a bit cloudy, they had this big sort of panic and everybody had to go inside and get out of the way. So they, you know, they're moderating their behavior to make sure they're not in the wrong place at the wrong time. But you've got one in a million chance of being struck by lightning.
Speaker B:It's a good job Benjamin Franklin didn't take the same attitude.
Speaker C:Well, quite. We wouldn't be recording this podcast otherwise.
Speaker A:Yeah, this explains America's poor performance relatively in the World Cup as well. It's because they keep, they must disrupt training for everyone.
Speaker B:Yeah, but look, I think one day of football playing in this country. I don't want to, we probably shouldn't spend the whole podcast talking about lightning. But it is worth saying, sorry, no, but listen, that one in a million is across the whole population, which includes people who spend their entire lives in the middle of New York City. And, you know, don't ever go outside. So if you're the kind of person who wanders around in a field routinely, whether that's because you're a farmer or a golfer or something, I'd say that you probably only, you know, let's say on average, maybe one in 20, one in 100 people are in that condition. So actually, the chance is considerably high. So if you're that kind of person, you're probably looking at one in, you know, something like one in 10,000 chance.
Speaker C:Yeah. And if you're a professional kite flyer in Florida, then you're in all sorts of bother. So yeah, but yeah, we tend to not, you know, we don't court those risks. But if you were, if you happen to be outside, you know, doing something that's considered fairly routine, and you got struck by lightning, you would say, well, they were in the wrong time at the wrong.
Speaker B:Yeah, I think so. I looked at another couple of things, just while we're trying to quantify the sort of bad luck element, just I mean, you can't do all of this, obviously. But I had to look, ONS published some stats on what they call avoidable mortality, right, which is, I think, either preventable in the sense that they could have been avoided through public health or prevention interventions, and amenable mortality, which is where they could have been avoided altogether. So, you know, through timely health care. So I guess that's kind of people who get injured, and then because they don't receive the treatment
Speaker C:that they ought to get, they die. Worth stressing that death is unavoidable, though, ultimately.
Speaker B: population, it comes to about: Speaker C:that you could definitely significantly lower your chances of getting into a fight, you know, through your through your behavior, like the, I always felt that, you know, that you that you basically, by not being aggressive towards other people. By not being an arse. By not being an arse, but you know, the number of occasions where somebody walks over to somebody, and kind of attacks them out of the blue must must be really, really small. You know, there has to be some sort of altercation before the fight occurs. And as a sort of, you know, middle class weakling, the solution is always to apologize, you know, profusely, for whatever obnoxious thing is let me buy you a person has actually done, you know, yes, sorry, you spilled your drink all over me. That kind of thing.
Speaker B:Well, that brings me on to a couple of questions, which I think, you know, so I think what was just to sum up a bit, I think we're saying that there isn't that much bad luck to go around. And there's not, in general, a great deal you can you can do. But there's a couple of things, questions that arise out of this, which is, okay, how, obviously, it is a trade off, and we're making decisions to expose ourselves to additional risk. In order to enjoy things in life, you know, the classic example, people think that everyone says is, well, you'd never go out if you were really worried about risk. Well, actually, there's quite a lot of accidents that happen at home. So you'd also have to do things like never have a bath. Or, you know, even go use the stairs. Never toast bread. No, exactly. Stairs are killers. So live in a bungalow, never bath. And, but I mean, you know, the point is, even if you do all that, you're not, you're probably not adding a great huge amount of life to your already fairly miserable existence. But so we're choosing to expose ourselves to certain risks. And now there's two things here, like when those risks do go bad. So when we get unlucky, when we turn out to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, under what circumstances should we feel sorry for people in that condition? So, you know, in other words, to what extent have people taken that risk on? And, of course, this relates to this issue of victim blaming as well, which is obviously something we try to avoid doing, is sort of saying, well, you know, you were drunk and you were in a pub. So, you know, that is kind of your choice to be exposed to the risk of being beaten up. We don't really like doing that. So I guess it's a question of who we think owns that risk and whether or not we should take responsibility for its outcomes and to what extent. And, you know, if that risk is caused by lightning or a bear, we're probably less inclined to blame the cause. But of course, if it's someone beating you up in a pub, it feels like you want to say, well, I don't really want to blame the victim here for putting themselves in that condition. You know, we want to blame the perpetrator. So I think I just wonder how that works, because I think we're a bit inconsistent
Speaker A:about all this. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know if you want to answer that, Chris. Yeah, well, I sort
Speaker C:of think there's an element of the culpability of the individual, right? So I think the wrong place and the wrong time, like, so, you know, the one that I'm always intrigued by is mountain climbers, right? Mountain climbing is dangerous, okay? You know, it's more dangerous than most other pursuits.
Speaker B:And I think climbing Everest was when we looked at a past podcast. Oh, yeah, way more dangerous than smoking. Climbing Everest is one of the most dangerous things you can do, I think, in terms
Speaker C:of expected life loss. No, exactly. So, but the point is, if somebody is climbing up something, and they fall off it, right, because of some climbing error that they met, then that's, you know, you wouldn't use the phrase, they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. But if there were an avalanche, and, you know, they were hit by an avalanche, you might use that. So there's something about the agency of the individual sort of involved, you know, if it's a kind of external force that affects them, I think we have a sort of sense that that was the wrong place at the wrong time. But mountain climbers are a good case in point, because every time I see, you know, you know, father of four dies, you know, swept off a mountain, tragic case, and I sort of think, well, actually, that's, I always feel mountain climbers are quite selfish people from the point of view of, you know, exposing their family to the risk of them dying.
Speaker B:Yeah, I must say, I was sorry, I know, I just always used to use them as an example of the inequity of smokers having to pay tax on cigarettes. And I always, I didn't ever knew why they wouldn't put equivalent taxes on mountain climbing equipment, since it's, you know, an even more dangerous activity. But yeah, sorry, carry on, Chris.
Speaker C:Yeah, so I think there's an element of the extent to which the person is involved, their own agency is involved in the in the issue. I think there's also an element of how much additional risk are they, are they exposing themselves to is another sort of, you know, so if they're doing something, manifestly dangerous, then they're not in the wrong place at the wrong time, even if something outside of their control affects them, because they're doing something dangerous. And I think the third thing is the extent to which you can know about the risk or see the risk. So like, like, I'm thinking about something like, you know, the COVID-19 spreading, right? At some point, you're, you're, you're in the wrong place at the wrong time. If you catch it, you know, you pick it up from somebody, but you can't really be expected to know that. I mean, you could say, you know, obviously, we have our lockdown kind of restrictions, which make us less likely to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. But you can't see the virus. So you know, you sort of, it's a hidden thing that you could pick up at any point. And so I feel like, you know, these, these people who venture out once, you know, and then they get the vaccine, they get the, the virus from, you know, some, some inter, one interaction they had or something, and you think, okay, yeah, they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. So I think there's sort of a number of elements that affect our, our thinking about that phrase. Yeah, I feel like
Speaker A:there isn't what phrase? Well, no, because I just want to say that I think, look, I think we're sort of skirting around this and bumping around a bit. I think there is validity to that phrase. And, you know, kind of summing up, I think what you've both said, which is that sometimes people do stupid stuff, that's going to get them killed or stuff. And we and we get when that happens,
Speaker B:right? Yeah, but I think what you're what this, the way that I'd summarise this is, it is not the level of risk, per se, or and I and I see Chris's point about kind of the sort of is it an external force or something you would agency over, I'm not sure that can be made meaningful on a fundamental level, although it certainly has an intuitive validity. But I feel like what this involves is a judgment about whether or not the risk trade off they made was reasonable. Yeah, in some sense, like, like, and also our perceptions accurate. I think that's one of
Speaker A:the things there's an inaccurate perception of risk. So a good example is, well, maybe it's not a good example, is the smoking cigarettes versus climbing Everest, people, it's skewed by other values, I would say. But yeah, I mean, I mean, people enjoy smoking, right? Yeah, they've made a trade off. But but smokers are always Yeah, sorry, Nick. And the other one is like the famous Malcolm Gladwell example of, you know, of middle class parents not letting their kids go around to another house, they know that the father keeps a gun, but they don't worry about going next door where they've got a swimming pool in the swimming, the kids more far more likely to die in a swimming pool. So it's this perception. But anyway, sorry, Nick, I interrupted you. Go on.
Speaker B:No, that's that. I think that's a good. That's a good example. I think that's right. But I feel like and then the culpability will relate to that judgment. You know, it's not actually well, you took on some risk, right? But it's you took on some risk, and it was needless or did not correspond to a sufficiently good payoff or you know, so I think we're making a judgment about the quality of the decision making somewhere. But no, I just wanted to say about bad about what we mean by luck, actually, Chris's thing made me think about that the COVID issue is, because I mean, really, what we mean is, you know, when we talk about luck, we're talking about a kind of ignorance, you know, it's an ignorance of, well, let's say, where the bears are right now, or, you know, in the case of smoking, there is one cigarette out there, which will be the one that gives you cancer, you know, we talk about it as though it's well, a kind of probability over time, but actually, really, it's, it's, you know, that there will be one event where you get cancer. If you knew which cigarette that was, you could just avoid that cigarette.
Speaker A:Yeah, exactly. Give it to someone you dislike. It's a bit like Baldrick carving his name on the bullet carving his own name on the bullet. Yeah, yeah. He's got the name on it. He's fine.
Speaker B:That's right. So I think, and I think that's, you know, really, the sort of cure for luck is information. And I think, you know, that's, you know, that's probably a route what we, what we're, you know, where luck, bad luck comes from is the same as ignorance. But yeah, yeah.
Speaker A:I think for it, what I was gonna say, Chris, is we kind of need, there's a question I want to ask, but so we need to move towards a conclusion. And perhaps this might be the opportunity, go for it,
Speaker C:Chris. Yeah, well, no, I was just gonna say that. I think you're right, Fraser, that it is values laden, though, because there's definitely a morality to the phrase. And that's, that's why, you know, that's why I don't think it can be broken down purely analytically, because, you know, like, if you take, for example, let's say a police officer killed in the line of duty, right, shot, and you would say, well, you know, they walked into this situation, and they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. But a drug dealer who gets shot, you wouldn't say they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, because you would think, well, they're in a hazardous career. Well, so are police officers. But because they're doing, you know, something morally bad, and police officers are doing something morally good. We use that phrase to, you know, put that put that
Speaker A:varnish of values on top of it. And also, you know, Hayne, here's another Aleph lesson here, I think, which is that there's another layer on this, which is aims, what are your aims in life? So let's say you're that drug dealer, but you absolutely love dealing drugs. It's a great environment, you meet great people, lovely friends, you have, you get to have some free drugs as well, you have a good life, it's fine, you know, and all right, you end up sort of, you know, a deal goes wrong, you get shot, and so on. But hey, you were living your best life. So yeah, who's to criticize,
Speaker B:right? It's, you know, not Yeah, just well, you shouldn't get high on your own supply. Anything else we want to say before my question? I just, I just want to throw in a reference to Borges, because we can write because he wrote one of his short stories was the lottery in Babylon, which is really good fun. It's it's talks about this lottery in a sort of putative fictional lottery in Babylon in the ancient times, where they decided to make it more spicy by adding punishments. So sometimes you would, you know, you'd be imprisoned or fined, or, you know, your house would be burnt down. And eventually, because everyone, everyone joined the lottery, everyone played the lottery. Eventually, they stopped selling tickets, and they just gave out the punishments and the rewards. And the idea is the suggestion is that actually all luck in life, good and bad is still being, you know, administered through the lottery officials, operating in secret, I think is really fun idea.
Speaker A:I like that. And that segues nicely to the question I've got. And let's see if you think it's a worthwhile question is quite an obvious one, which is, give us an instance of massive, good luck, notwithstanding everything we've been saying about, you know, perceptions, etc. Yeah, when were you in the right place at the right time? Or when you were in the wrong place at the wrong time? I can tell you where I was in the wrong place at the right time. Yeah, or rather
Speaker B:the right place at the wrong, the, I might have mentioned this before, I think, because it's got a connection to my cursed, my cursed painting. But I won't mention that now. Well, I've got a print of El Triunfo del Muerte, which is a Bruegel painting that's in the Prado. And I, being a sort of slightly morbid teenager, I bought a copy of it. And it's basically zillions of skeletons roaming around murdering people. It's quite an exciting painting. And I put the painting up on, you know, the print rather on my wall as a teenager, and was doing some revision in my room and then went upstairs for a couple of minutes to get a cup of tea or something. And I heard this enormous crash, a really loud rumbling sort of crash. And when I went into the room, my shelves, which were on the wall, had all fallen down with everything on them, right on top of where I would have been sitting if I'd have been doing my revision. And they were actually also above my bed. So had I been in bed when that happened, it could have been pretty unpleasant. Yeah, but the only thing that was left standing around my desk was this painting. So I thought, well, you know, this is death reminding me that ultimately he will have the triumph over me. But in the meantime, I have to keep hold of that
Speaker A:painting. You see, I can't. I've decided it's cursed. This is like either the start or the end of a horror movie. But yeah, I rather like that. So I'd like to say I've been unlucky in some things, but actually, it's always just been bad judgment. That's, you know, it's the wrong person at the wrong time. Yeah, exactly. I mean, I think one sort of thing is it wasn't exactly lucky or unlucky, but I used to live in the Middle East and I lived in Qatar. And it's not really an example, but maybe it's just another version of the conversation that we're having. So I used to drive through the desert every day to this place called Ras Lafan, which was the other end of the peninsula. It's quite a small peninsula, so it only took about an hour or so. And you think, oh, the desert, driving through the desert, that sounds lovely. No. What can go wrong? Yeah, well, no, but also, I mean, most desert, I mean, or certainly this desert was just like, you know, desolate, rocky kind of stuff. And there were warning signs about camels everywhere, which was always quite fun. But anyway, Qatar is quite a dangerous place to drive just because the level of the ability of most drivers there is pretty awful, to be honest. You know, the accident rate is horrific, you know. And I was just having a chat with a fellow teacher and we were having this kind of risk reward kind of conversation. And I think he said something which I didn't understand and then I did understand, which was that, you know, if someone said here's a thousand pounds to go and sort of walk off a cliff or whatever, you'll be fine. You wouldn't do it. Yet someone pays you because you get paid quite well in Qatar. If someone sort of pays you, you know, thousands per month to sort of drive through the desert or stuff, you'll go, yeah, that's no, yeah, fine, I'll do that. But actually you're doing something really dangerous. And so I had a very dangerous drive every day, really, without even thinking about it. But that's no, that's not really an anecdote. I once fell through some ice. Okay. Good luck, bad luck, stupid decision.
Speaker B:Well, I mean, it wouldn't have happened if you weren't standing on ice. Right. So there's a way you could have reduced the risk of that happening.
Speaker C:Yeah. I mean, if it had been the summer, you'd have been walking on water.
Speaker A:Right, yeah, exactly. Just one step away from, yeah, from divinity, really. But yeah, no, I mean, but also I was drunk. I was young. I was drunk. It was springtime, right? It was night time. And maybe, you know, you shouldn't put yourself in that situation and walk across like a lake come river.
Speaker C:Yeah, I mean, I mean, you say shouldn't. I mean, I would argue definitely not.
Speaker B:Yeah, so anyway, what was the outcome? Did you go under? Did you get out?
Speaker A:It gets worse, because I was really lucky. Hey, there you go. There's that phrase. And actually, there was someone in front of me, we fell through the ice at the same time. And by the way, we're walking across the river because it was miles to go around over a bridge. And we both fell through the ice at the same time. But we were lucky in as much as just like just our legs went in, we managed to clamber out. So no sort of horrific deaths or getting swept away under the ice or stuff. But here's the icing on the cake, right? The ice on the lake. Yeah, we both managed to get out. I think we retracted. To cut a long story short, I got attacked by a gang of dogs in the same night. Okay, by a gang of wild Polish dogs, which happens a lot like abandoned dogs in the city centre. But to put it on the other side, I was running through the street screaming as well, like whooping and you know, so I can't help but feel like brought
Speaker B:You're so full of joy at having avoided an icy death that you got mauled by dogs. Yeah, with legs of mutton in his pockets.
Speaker A:Yeah, and I was worried I got rabies because you know, I did get you know, blood was drawn by again, I can't help feel that I drew it on myself a little bit.
Speaker C:I don't think anyone would have said you were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Speaker A:I don't think they would have. I don't think they would have. Chris, anything for you?
Speaker C:Yeah, well, just where I was in sort of nearly the wrong place at the wrong time. When I was a student, I was asleep one night, coming back to something we were talking about earlier. And there was this sort of blinding flash and boom, which I could see through my closed eyes. And it was obviously a lightning strike right at, you know, very close to the building I was in. Now, luckily, I was in the building and not, you know, fishing outside or something. But that was when I realized quite what lightning is up, you know, you're obviously normally kilometers away from it or whatever. But that was quite a humbling experience. And yeah, if Zeus had been a bit more accurate that day, maybe I wouldn't be here today.
Speaker A:Yeah, I wonder if that comes under the category of near misses, but maybe that's different to wrong place, wrong time, right place, right time. I don't know. Okay, I think we'll wrap up there. So, as always, thanks for listening. If you have any thoughts or suggestions for topics, you can email us at podcast at alephinsights.com. We'd love to hear from you. If you've enjoyed the podcast, what should people do, Chris?
Speaker C:They should strike the like button with righteous fury.
Speaker A:Very good. All right. Thanks, as always, for listening. I'm Fraser McGruer. We've been here with Chris Wragg and Nick Hare of Aleph Insights. And until next time, goodbye.
