Regarding the way we look at funding, I think if you value the commercialization of research, out of which we get disruptive technology, compared to classical discovery-based research, the funding should also become more outcome oriented because the way our granting model works now is that it's very input driven. Submit your grants. I look at your profile. If you have secured these grants over the past years, it's good enough justification that I give you this grant. If we have a young researcher who is just focusing on the outcome—look at the industry attention that I have; look at my prototype—it's extremely difficult for that researcher to get government funding, because the model is very much input driven. If we make our funding model also equally a bit outcome oriented—show me your industry attention; show me the projects that you have launched—and we use that as a criteria to fund your development, I think that works a lot.
Another great example is in the U.K., in the Shoreditch area east of London, where about six years ago the U.K. government was convincing people to move there and now they call it Silicon Roundabout. It's a fantastic place in London, full of entrepreneurs, full of researchers. At the same time, after the government did that, universities such as UCL, University College London, and Imperial College started to put their campuses there to connect to that ecosystem. If the government rallied behind an initiative like that, you can get ecosystems like Tech City in London.