← New Books Network
New Books Network
Luis Felipe Murillo, "Common Circuits: Hacking Alternative Technological Futures" (Stanford UP, 2025)
00:41:20
Loading summary
Transcript39 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hello, everybody. This is Marshall Poe. I'm the editor of the New Books Network, and if you're listening to the New Books Network, I imagine you like to read, and I'm wondering if you have a goal to read more this year. How about a goal to read more of what you love and less of what you don't? The Proofread podcast is here to help. Hosted by Casey and Tyler, two English professors and avid readers with busy lives, Proofread helps you decide what books are worth spending your precious time on and what books aren't. They feature 15 minute episodes that give you everything you need to know about a book to decide if you should read it or skip it. You'll get a brief synopsis, fun and witty commentary, no spoilers and no sponsored reviews. It's just what Casey and Tyler think. Life's too short to read a bad book. So subscribe to the Proofread podcast today. And by the way, there's a new season coming. Thanks very much.
- [00:52]
B
Marshall's buyers are hustling hard to get amazing new gifts into stores right up to the last minute. Like a designer perfume for that friend who never RSVP'd wishlist topping toys for her kids who came too.
- [01:03]
C
Mm.
- [01:04]
B
Belgian chocolates for the neighbor. A cozy scarf for your boss, and a wool jacket for your husband that you definitely did not. Almost forget. Marshalls. We get the deals, you give the good stuff, even at the last minute.
- [01:18]
C
Phew.
- [01:19]
B
Find a Marshall's near you.
- [01:21]
C
Limu Emu.
- [01:23]
A
And Doug, here we have the Limu Emu in its natural habitat, helping people customize their car insurance and safe hundreds with Liberty Mutual. Fascinating. It's accompanied by his natural ally, Doug.
- [01:39]
C
Limu is that guy with the binoculars watching us.
- [01:42]
A
Cut the camera. They see us. Only pay for what you need@libertymutual.com Liberty.
- [01:46]
C
Liberty. Liberty. Liberty Savings. Very unwritten by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and affiliates. Excludes Massachusetts.
- [01:52]
A
Welcome to the New Books Network.
- [01:57]
D
Hello, everyone. Welcome to New Books in Anthropology, a podcast channel on the New Books Network. I'm Liliana Gill, a host on the channel. And today I have the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Luis Felipe Murillo, author of Common Hacking Alternative Technological Futures, published by Stanford University Press in 2025. Welcome to the show. Lf I'm very happy to be talking about your work.
- [02:22]
C
Oh, thank you, Liliana. I'm super happy to be here with you and super grateful for the invitation.
- [02:28]
D
To get us started. It would be great if you could tell us a little bit about Common circuits. How did you come to this project, what made you want to write a book about hackerspaces? And also if you could explain the term hackerspaces to the unfamiliar listeners, I think it would be very helpful.
- [02:44]
C
Yes. Well, the book is pretty much a product of my experiences and what I call common circuits. So before getting into this project, I worked in previous projects looking at technopolitical projects, informations in different contexts. So the first project I did was on the experience of social movements with free and open source technologies in Brazil in the late 1990s. And in that context I was really interested in the approximation of social movements at the time, the alter corporate globalization movement to technological alternatives. And at that time I noticed that there was a very important movement that was very much local movement of the labor movement, getting closer to the debates about technological autonomy and incorporating free and open source technologies in in for their communication, for their information infrastructures. And I noticed that this local effervescence was really connected with circuits that extended to other contexts as well. So it was in the World Social Forum that I first experienced that, you know, my first experience with common circuits. And that led me to conceive of project that led to this book, Common Circuits. And to think about these broader circuits of exchange where you have certain locations with a very specific political history, infrastructural condition, a very specific set of technologies and people working on different projects, but that are articulated with other contexts and articulated in the sense that you have the circulation of people and projects and symbols even across these different locations. And that's what allows for these locations to actually do the work that they do. So hackerspaces is one of the instantiations of common circuits, but there's several others, right? You have software projects for privacy protection online. You have open scientific instrumentation for addressing problems of public health, like, let's say, exposure to harmful levels, levels of radiation. You have also ideological political projects of technological autonomy in different locations that make use of free and open source technologies. So Common Circuits is an attempt of accounting for these spaces of circulation and what happens locally when these different collectives in different locations are articulated with a more transnational space of exchange. So that's kind of how I got into this. I started studying in Brazil in the context of social movements in Brazil. And then I started exploring the connections between the local technopolitics with a more transnational technopolitics. And then I end up studying different locations. I end up in Japan to study the free software formation in Japan. And that's kind of how the book got started. And then I end up in different locations. We're going to talk about them. So just to go back to one of your. A part of your question, the last part of your question about hackerspaces. So hackerspaces are super interesting because they are a fairly recent network of community spaces where people teach themselves about information technology, but they also create little groups to teach other people about information technology. So usually you go to a hacker space and you get access to workshops on different technologies. People will be talking about a particular technology for protecting privacy online. People will be workshopping different open hardware technologies. People will be doing art projects, political projects, all sorts of projects. And they invite people to come and participate and learn about the technologies that are being discussed in the context of the workshop. So I found this local instantiation of common circuits in a spatial, in like a specific place like these community spaces to be extremely interesting. So that's fundamentally what a hackerspace is. It's a community lab where people are like experimenting with all sorts of technologies and they're trying to teach other people about them. So one part that you see in the book is that I discuss the experience of free hacker spaces in the Pacific Rim. I looked into the space of circulation and exchange in San Francisco, mainland China and Japan. And the reason why I picked these three is because these places are really vibrant. And I notice a very strong circulation of people and technologies across these three sites. That would justify the site selection why I decided to write about these spaces and not other spaces. So, yeah, we can talk more about hacker spaces, but in a nutshell, I think that pretty much sums it up.
- [08:32]
D
Yeah, that's fantastic. I think it was a very, very vivid description. My question, or my next question, is about the capaciousness of hacking as a concept. As you explain in the book, hacking can have many different genealogies and meanings. And I guess my question actually has two parts. One is, why did you decide to focus on anti capitalist hacker spaces? In particular, what to make of hacker spaces that, let's say are less, I don't know, progressive? And I also very much enjoyed learning about how hacking unfolds differently in different cultural contexts. You were about to mention that. Could you highlight some of the key contrasts that you observed between hacking in the U.S. china and Japan?
- [09:17]
C
Yes. So I think I start the book with what I call these 10 experiences with hacking and then hacking in quotes. Because when I was writing the book, I was thinking about this dispersion of the term hacking and how it got appropriated in crazy, crazy ways. I remember a colleague sent me a photo of a supermarket. And it was like they were selling chips, you know, potato chips or something, and they had like, oh, like, you know, hacking this and that. And it was just like, what even, like, you know, to sell, like, chips. Like, people are using the concept of hacking. So there's like hacking was. Became everything under the sun, right? People were hacking. Like we're doing body, body modification and calling it like biohacking biology, biological hacking. Biological hacking laboratories, like, started and grew in the United States, in Europe and in other parts of the hacking was used also in the corporate context for like, simple, like software development projects, like in Silicon Valley. You know, like big corporations, big tech companies would use the term and identify with the term. So I found it really strange that it was just really there was this dispersion of the term. Hacking became everything, right? So I start the book with these three expressions, like three manifestations, cultural manifestations of hacking. And then I get into this very specific common circuits where people use the term to identify themselves and identifying their peers with a very specific articulation of hacking means to them, right? So I do this in the context of. In spatial terms, in the context of the hacker spaces. And I do this in the context of people's trajectories, how people become hackers. And as technologies, they identify themselves as such. So in terms of the politicization of hacking, this is something that was a really interesting problem for me because I thought it was a problem for the literature on hacking. I was really interested in this process of politicization of technical expertise, of computing expertise and how they get this form of skill and skillment of people is used for political purposes. The book has this narrative arc where I explore the spatialization of hacking, how hacking gets embodied into physical laboratories in a particular location, but also the personification of hacking, how people become hackers. And the idea I explored these two dimensions is because I felt these two dimensions were not absent, but not fully developed in the literature on hacking. And I felt that anthropology could actually contribute to the literature on hacking by exploring these two dimensions, the spatial dimension and personhood as this other dimension. And the idea was to explore these two processes, the spatial and the personal, as a way to respond to the question of the politicization of computing expertise. And that's how I get to the conclusion of the book, by discussing, okay, so are these experiments that are happening in common circuits actually prefiguring a new form of technopolitics? And if so, what are the characteristics of this new technopolitics? So this is how I, you know, the book is a response to this question. I start with this question and I end the book with this question. So I think that's a way of addressing what hacking has become, I would say, in the past decade, decade and a half. So that's kind of the intervention that I'm hoping to do with the book in the literature, in the debate about hacking and the history of hacking.
- [13:12]
D
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to me. Do you want to talk a little bit about the different cultural context just so the listeners and be excited to read your book and learn more?
- [13:23]
C
Yeah. So one thing that you see in the book is that you will be very. You'll be taken aback by the fact that hacking is very different across context. So, and this is something that I noticed by. Despite having a common circuitry that connects different locations and different hacker spaces, you see in the book that the formation of the hacker spaces and the possibilities for cultivating hacking expertise is very different across context. And the nature of the projects that people conduct are very different as well. So you see, for example, an experience of Noise Bridge, which is a hackerspace, one of the oldest hackerspaces in the United States, but a hackerspace in San Francisco. You see that this laboratory is organized, is perceived as organized against the bigger startup culture that is part of the experience with digital technologies in San Francisco and in the San Francisco Bay area at large. Right. So you have an influx of anarchist writers and thinkers and technologists who identified with anarchism. There are different understandings of anarchism, of course, and there's people who have traditional tradition, have experience of participating in social movements and intersecting their interest in technology with political activism. And then you see projects, for example, a very important one for Noise Bridge for a very long period of time was to participate in the Tor network. And the Tor network is a network of volunteers who run Internet services to create a parallel network that supports privacy and anonymity online to protect Internet users from mass surveillance. So this was a very important project for a very long time for the community. And Nice Bridge was running one of the most powerful, powerful services, servers, to support the network for quite a bit of time. So this would you see in this particular context, for example. But then if you go to Japan, you have a very different experience, which I race this computer hobbyist space where people are playing with microcontrollers, doing art projects, doing all sorts of experiments, but it's pretty much an ordinary computer club. You have people with experience with radio, amateur radio. You have people with experience of Electronics, computer networks, et cetera. But it's pretty much a computer club where people go to play. People just do all sorts of, like, fun projects, right? But then you have the outset of the Fukushima disaster, the triple disaster, Right.
- [16:34]
D
That's my favorite part of the book, I gotta tell you. The DIY monitoring.
- [16:39]
C
Yes, because it speaks to your work as well, right? Like in the cultures of tinkering and all of the work that you're doing in this direction. So the thing happens in Japan that you have, like, an ordinary computer club, and all of a sudden you have this influx of people from different hacker space, from different hacker communities coming in and say, hey, we want to help, whatever we can do to help. Because we know that the situation in Japan is extremely bad and extremely complicated, and a lot of people don't know what to do. So what they did was just to get, like, an ordinary microcontroller and a microcontroller platform that is called Arduino. They started experimenting with different sensors. And they put together this box that they would assemble in workshops and community workshops and then distribute. That was pretty much like a recreation of a Geiger counter, a traditional Geiger counter that is used to measure the level of exposure to harmful radiation in the human body. And they would make this device and distribute this device, and they created a large network by distributing this that started with the hackerspace as a laboratory. And I explore all the common circuits around this, because it's not only the hackerspace, but the hackerspace was a key space. So. So it was very different from the context of the political context of San Francisco, the anarchist hacker space that is Neus Bridge. And then if you go to Japan, China, the context is even very different, Right? So just to make this long conversation short, so if you go to China, you have a group of young technologists, engineers, and they're really interested in how they can actually participate in these international circuits of production of open technologies. And then at that's what I discuss. I discuss the formation of these little companies in spaces that are autonomous spaces for exploring open technologies. So it is across sites, the context, the political, economic, cultural context is so different. And yet there are common circuits connecting these hacker spaces that create the conditions for people to participate in this collective production of digital technologies. And this is one of the key things that I argue for and I try to demonstrate demographically in the book. So good, so good, so good Score holiday gifts Everyone wants for way less.
- [19:10]
B
At your Nordstrom Rack store Save on.
- [19:12]
D
Ugg, Nike Rag and Bone Vince Frame, Kurt Geiger London and more.
- [19:16]
C
Because there's always something new. I'm giving all the gifts this year with that extra 5% off when I use my Nordstrom credit card. Santa who join the NordicLub at Nordstrom.
- [19:26]
B
Rack to unlock our best deals.
- [19:28]
D
It's easy.
- [19:29]
C
Big gifts, big perks.
- [19:30]
B
That's why you rack toast the holidays in a new way and raise a glass of Rumchata, a delicious, creamy blend of horchata with rum. Enjoy it over ice or in your coffee. Rumchata. Your holiday cocktails just got sweeter. Tap or click the banner for more Drink rumors Responsibly Caribbean rum with real dairy cream. Natural and artificial flavors. Alcohol 13.75% by volume 27.5 proof. Copyright 2025 Agave Loco Brands, Pojoaque, Wisconsin. All rights reserved. This message may be shocking to many millennials. If you are one, you might want to sit down. Right now. Loads of people are searching the following on Depop Low Rise jeans, Holzer Tyler top velour tracksuit, hookah shell, necklace, disc belt. You likely placed these in the dark of your closet in 2004, never to be seen again. But if you can find it in yourself to dust them off, there are a lot of people who will give you money for them. Sell on Depop, where taste recognizes taste.
- [20:33]
D
Awesome. I think this is a good moment to talk about method. I thought Common Circuits is very original as you work across very different spaces, multiple countries around the Pacific Rim. As you expl. And your interlocutors themselves also circulate across these spaces, they have each other as reference points during conversation. You say that this is not. I'm quoting. You say that this is not a comparative exercise, but something else. So I was curious, what is it? How are you thinking in terms of method? And could you tell us what this multilocated approach enabled you to do, but also its challenges. Thinking of grad students now and people who want to do this type of work.
- [21:15]
C
Right? Well, so this. This came about as I discussed a little bit in the beginning of our conversation. I started doing very local work in the context of one social movement and its appropriation of digital technologies for political purposes in the global South. In Brazil. In the south of Brazil. I started to study the networks that were that were formed in this political and technical effervescence around the World Social Forum, but also around the international we call Fizzlies, the foreign international itself Deliveries International Free Software Forum, which was an important venue for articulating projects and bringing people together from different parts of the World, it was a fairly international space. So I started to realize that I needed to figure out a different way of doing ethnography and doing an anthropology in the context of these international circuits. And at the time a very important conversation was happening in anthropology. It was a time where anthropology of globalization was in its peak effervescence in the first decade of the 2000s. Right. So yeah, so there's this conversation in anthropology, globalization. And then there was a discussion about the necessity of changing our, our methodological approach to the study of global phenomena. And the proposal for the development of a multi sided ethnographic approach was being discussed and developed at this time. And this is the work of George Marcus. He published an article on this and then it became a foundational piece for us to discuss how to do do multi sided ethnographic research, but also to address the problems that that creates for participant observation in more sustained and in depth ethnographic research. So I discuss this in the beginning of the book in terms of commoning as a method. So in addition to the multi sided approach, one thing that I realized through my experience in doing this research is that it is very important to participate in these common circuits, in the projects that happen in the local, in the context of the hacker space, and also the projects that have more of an international angle. Because participating in commonly in learning about these technologies and helping to share them, in helping to create spaces for sharing is a fundamental way for creating conditions for doing multi sided research of these networks. If you come as a more isolated researcher, if you've just to observe and not partake and not participate in the practices of commoning. My experience is that it becomes much harder for you to actually understand the experience of participating in this common circuit. So I described this in the beginning of the book in terms of the methodology that I think Cube. It is one that is productive for this kind of work. And I discussed the multi sided aspect that is fundamental for this line of work. So one thing I wanted to add that is very important is that. To conceive of a project that is multi sided in nature, we need to conceive of an object of increase that is suitable for this kind of work. So not every project is suitable for multi sided research. And that's the point of concerning comparison that you asked me. You need to conceive of a project in terms of a network that connects sites, instead of taking each site as a site in itself that you then compare with other sites. So the book is not a comparison of hacking in San Francisco, hacking in China, Hacking in Japan. It's not a comparison of hacker space in one location, another location, all location. It is a study of what happens when a common circuitry is created across these sites to enable a certain kind of technical and political and cultural phenomena. And what I'm studying is what happens in the context of the circuit circuitry, what is made possible in the context of the circuitry. So this is a very different project than going and doing a comparative study of these sites. And again, this is a key methodological orientation. Multi sided research is not comparative research. It's not traditional comparative research in anthropology, which would involve doing traditional participant observations in a particular site versus another site versus another site, and then writing a comparative exercise. So this is not what common circuits is. This is not the methodological orientation that I took. I took a very different one because I needed to. Okay, so now the challenges. There's several challenges with this line of work. There are practical challenges that have been discussed in the literature, and I experienced them myself. Visas in the authorization for circulation. Quickly I realized that the circuitry and the technologists that I was working with, they were part of a group of people of high privilege of being able to circulate in these cosmopolitan networks. I didn't have much of that privilege as an underfunded grad student. As you know. As, you know, like in anthropology, we don't have that much funding to do a more ambitious project. So I did what I could in terms of, like pulling funding from different sources and what I could to actually make this possible. And I would just request support from everyone that I could find, professors and organizations and anything that I could find to support visa applications. So I became a professional visa applicant. So if you need advice on applying for visas for any part of the world, I can fill out these applications with my eyes closed. I can advise on them. I can even start a business like providing, you know, like visa services, because that's kind of something that I learned. I learned to navigate all of that. And it was a huge challenge because it was really time consuming. Another thing that is difficult is that you have to figure out how to prioritize, what to pay attention to, what to follow, given the time that you have to spend on each side. So I didn't have a full year or more than a year in one particular location. I circulated across these locations. I would spend from six to eight months in each place. And then what I did to continue to follow what was happening in a particular location was to attend conferences where people from these different community spaces would Also attend. So it was part of the work. Also going to international gatherings, conferences, symposia, workshops, whatever was bringing folks together. I would come as well. I would also help organize some of these gatherings just to be, you know, with folks and, and, and, and, and be thinking about what they were thinking about and, and, and, and to put me in a condition to be able to write about the common circuits. So that's another challenge that the time spent in a place funding, permission to circulate. It's a huge one. Oh, and of course, how do you get access to these spaces? How do you get access to these circuits? Again, I think this idea of the commoning as a method is a really important one because as you start participating, observing, writing, getting involved, I find it very difficult to not be a participant that is helping in the processes of common, of sharing and that is a way through which you actually get access to these processes and spaces and projects. Because otherwise I think your access as an anthropologist, as an ethnographer will be compromised. You wouldn't be able to actually write in depth if you didn't have good access to these things. And practicing ethnographer knows access is fundamental. Like if we are shut down from on what is happening in the circuits in these networks, we don't get to do ethnography, we don't get to do anthropological work. So for me, commenting is a way through form of access and it's important to add it's not an instrumental approach. I'm not doing this because I think I need to do it just to get access and then write my book. This is something that I actually believe that a form of common is important. Important for figuring out alternative political and technological futures that I believe can be an outcome of a social anthropology. Social. Cultural anthropology research. Not that I start with answers, political answers to social, political problems and then I anticipate all the answers and I just go do research to confirm what I believe in. What I think is that the research can actually contribute to a broader political conversation that extrapolates anthropology about what are we going to do with our digital technology, what are we going to do with our scientific and technology projects and our political futures in the present moment. I think it's a pressing question and I think the hacker community has specific ways of responding to this question. Question. That's why I was interested in working alongside them. Right. So yeah, this is a very long winded answer to your question about method, but I think I touched on most of the points that you were asking.
- [32:08]
D
I was going to say that your commitment really comes across in the book. Since you mentioned access, I think this relates well to my question about inclusion. And I had a question, I wrote it in this way as an ethnographer of tech myself. The question of gender and inclusion is inescapable. You address it in key moments throughout the book, but I would love to hear a bit more. The spaces you describe have radical openness as an aspiration, but in practice we know that that ideal often falls short. And for listeners who may not be familiar with hackerspaces, could you talk about how questions of inclusion and belonging showed up during your research? And as you move between these different field sites, did you notice meaningful differences in how they try to cultivate a diverse community?
- [32:57]
C
Well, this is such an important question, and I know this is an important question for you in your research project and now your book project and the things you have been working on. So this is a question that was really important for me before even thinking of writing the book, how I got started with the, the. The. The. My dissertation project, my gr. My. My graduate research project. One question that was really important for me when I got started, when I was thinking, first thinking, started thinking about this, was that there was a very strong discourse in the, you know, in this, in this context of like free and open source technology development at the time, you know, in the. In 2008 and 2009 and 10 and before, of course, even about these technologies. They were open because they were open to, for everyone to participate. Everyone was welcome, anyone could come and participate. And there is, this is at the same time true and not true. It is true because there's a level of openness and, and there's a true genuine interest in many people in the community to actually bring and welcome people to participate. And this is something I experience and I describe in the book. But at the same time they're really difficult symbolic barriers across nationality, ethnicity, gender, class, race that make it very difficult for folks to participate and have a sustained, meaningful participation in the context of free and open source projects and for the participation in this common circuit. So one question that I ask is it's common for whom, under what conditions? And I think this is a key question that I was. A question that I pursued. It is something that is important to highlight and something I discuss in the book as well, is that these spaces, these community spaces, there's a lot of social and technical experiments happening, happening, but at the same time they're not immune to dynamics of power and domination and subjugation and control that extrapolate these spaces and we see these dynamics playing out in the context of these community experiments all the time. And this is something that I know you have been looking into this and you know this very well from your work that this is the case. So our responsibility as researchers is not just to say, oh, this is, you know, like this is an open community, everyone is welcome and buy the discourse, but actually understand and explain how things actually happen in the experience of common circuits and common technologies. Right. What is made possible, what is made impossible? What are the frictions, what are the possibilities? This is something that really motivated me to, to write a book because I think this is a pressing question. I do believe that there's a very strong potential for commoning and for creating technologies otherwise. And this happens in many ways. But there are also several fundamental problems of discrimination and exclusion that happen in the circuits that we need to account and we need to discuss. One, this is something that is happening more in the literature now. I would say the important interventions in this direction. And I think we need more, we need more of this line of work to continue having these debates and advance the work that needs to be done in the space.
- [37:08]
D
Yeah, that's great. So just to finish our conversation, now that common circuits is out there in the world, what can expect to reach. Read from lf in the future, is there a new project or a set of questions that you're excited about?
- [37:25]
C
Yes, well, I continue to be super interested in intersection between politics and digital tech, super interested in social and technical political experiments to imagine different futures, not only imagining, but enacting, you know, bringing about so positive social change that we, we all need. And so social, technical, political, environmental change. So one thing I've been working on that I'm super excited about is that I've been working with a, a group of colleagues and friends on this edited volume that we call Political Software, which is a set of. It's a collection of historical examples and contemporary examples of software projects that have been designed with the political sensibilities of social movements in different parts of the world. So we have colleagues working in Kenya and Brazil and Germany and Netherlands and Brazil and many other parts of the world. And we're really interested in recuperating some of these histories that people don't know about the proto history of social media connected with the anti corporate globalization. For example, Twitter was a prototype in the context of this community before it became a commercial service. For example, there's several examples like that of experiments that were appropriated for commercial purposes, but were developed in the context of these communities. I'm super excited with this. The book will be. Probably is going to take another year and a half to. Books take time. Yeah. They take so long. So I hope it's not like it takes too long, but yeah. Political Circuits. I'm sorry, Political Software and Atlas. We are trying to create this atlas of political software projects. So this is something that is coming up. It's going to come up. Yeah. I don't know exactly when, but we're trying. It's a big group of us. My colleague Aaron McElroy and I are organizing this edited volume. So there's a site if you want to check it out. It's called politicalsoftware.unixjazz.org and you can see more information, the description of the project and who's involved and all the projects. There's just like, we have 12 of us, so in the interest of time, I'm not going to describe all of the projects, but it's on the website and if you want to know more, just, you know, drop me a line and we can talk more about the project. Maybe, you know, of a political software project that you would like to include. So you're welcome to join the collective in getting this done. And we, yeah, we want to be, you know, to write something. It's a real pleasure. It's like a lot of people are not academics, so we're writing something that is like super accessible and it's going to be open access and it's a. It's a really. It's a fun project. I feel like, super. Yeah. Excited about it because it's very different from writing like a more academic book. Right. It's just like. Yeah, it's freer. You know, you have like, you get to write, like, just write, you know, just instead of thinking about, you know, like all the academic things that you need to do in order to write like an academic book that is going to be evaluated by peers. Right. Like academic, academically. So, yeah. So this is what is exciting me now at the next project.
- [41:17]
D
That sounds very exciting. We are all looking forward to seeing it. I'll list the website on the New Books Network website and thank you so much, Elif.
- [41:27]
C
Thank you so much, Leona. I'm super grateful again for your interest in the book, for your time, for your questions, and I look forward to read your book next and discussing with you.
- [41:39]
D
Let's see about that.
- [41:41]
C
Thank you. Thank you. Bye bye.