No doubt. As the inventor of the TrackX technology, I couldn’t agree with you more that to be effective the robot has to either add functionality that the human doesn’t have (tremor dampening as the Da Vinci does, or simultaneous multi-planer viewing as with TrackX) or take difficult tasks and make them simpler or quicker. Ideally it does all 3. Design is critical. As a rule, less is more and simplicity and resisting adding functionality make a better device. And making people acquire new skills rather than seamlessly merging into their historic workflow is a massive headwind to adoption. Totally agree that we can solve problems when the right engineer appreciates the problem and incorporates these rules of adoption.