>> i am mark crumpton. you are watching "bloomberg west." obama is rejecting describing -- he said it would validate groups like the islamic state and imply that america was with war at the entire state. pres. obama: miss treat our fellow citizens. it has been a shameful part of our history. presidential remarks came following a meeting with the national security council. manch officials say a

described as a jihadi recruiter made a jihadi video after he fatally stabbed a police officer into his partner. he says "i just killed a police officer into his wife." the couple's three-year-old son was held hostage but the killer was -- oppositione research on donald trump. he and hillary clinton were targeted by russian spies. the news, 24 hours a day, powered by 2400 journalists and news bureaus around the world. i am mark hampton. bloomberg west is next. been -- mark crumpton. is next.g west,"

emily: this is "bloomberg west" live from the 2016 bloomberg technology conference in san francisco, bringing together entrepreneurs, investors and corporate leaders around the globe with minds behind the game-changing products, processes that will drive the next wave of innovation across the tech industry. we heard from a global founder, drew houston, the twitter share just a few of the voices today. but we will also be bringing you -watched moments throughout the next hour. stay tuned for much more coming up on this edition of "bloomberg west." first, from its founding google has been at the heart of dysfunction in the tech industry. one of the way they help to -- at the heart of disruption in the tech industry. they help toys

continue to drive change is through gb. they have made a range of consumer tech advances like uber. they are developing a portfolio in the life sciences debate. joining me now on which industries look rife for disruption. thank you for being with me today. mark enters something interesting. spacee intersection is a that is very rife. i am curious what you think of that. you've invested heavily in biotechnology and you think about it so much. what do you think the impact on ai on bio will actually be? >> completely underestimated. we have in thinking and talking about this for a number of years. a quick example. around machine learning or ai. if you look at a product. and you can download. thatll find every minute your of you. even one you might not recognize your self.

likeu look at something neo antigens, which are a way to detect cancer, and you find that technology to the search of new diagnostic for cancer, it could revolutionize the entire health care industry. emily: you are investing in a company that has early diagnostics for cancer and may even identify it before it becomes cancer. i am curious about that. how do you handle things like overtesting? i mean, it seems like that should not be a problem. but the idea seems almost to extreme. >> it is likely biopsy companies. it has yet to work. but basically being able to detect cancer the moment you have it or even predicting it by sampling your blood, we do not have that capability at the we knowl challenges what we need to do to get there, and so i am very confident that this technology will exist and we hope we will be the developers on it.

but we know it is a very high-risk proposition. emily: what about gene editing? at what point do we have to start talking about the ethical issues of this technology? >> it is never too early to talk about it. the reality is that we can edit jeans right now. genes. we have invested in a number of companies. there is a flip side to that coin. there are scary things about new technology, fire could be scary because it could burn on your house but gene editing could be scary for all of the things you are imagining but at the same time it could be used to care with cysticdren fibrosis. i think the positives will far outweigh the negatives. emily: since we last spoke it has only gotten worse for sarin notes. should they be running the company?

>> that is up to the company. i do not know how it gets better from here. emily: do you think they could turn it around? >> i do not think there is any way to turn around. i do not think that the technology exists. emily: the public markets about been kind to the bio sector. >> i think the public markets are always wrong in the short-term and right in the long term. if you look generally, the long-term prospects for biotech are strong. in andy sector, it falls out of favor. be quite out of favor right now, but the reality is it will transform not only the length but the quality and duration of our lives. emily: tony fidel recently left unceremoniously. what went wrong and should we be worried about the future of ness? >> i would not be worried. i think it was reported unceremoniously, but how many successful founders still work at the big companies that hired them? youtube, andf

google is not there anymore. it is really shocking that tony decided to do something new and ness continues on. and will continue on. emily: is it the ideal to have a founder in the company? >> i do not know if it is the ideal. i think the reality is they are different leaders, different times. the ceo of google left and now there is another outstanding ceo. i think it depends. emily: speaking of the environment you are investors of uber. uber just raise multi-billions of dollars. >> i read about that. emily: emily: raising billions of mark endres and and his firm just raise half $1 billion. are we passed the idea of a downturn? where are we? it is that old adage, the difference between a recession and a depression is a recession is when you are out of work and a depression is one i am out of

work. it depends upon your point of view. they should always have an easy time of raising money as long as they are successful so it does not show me. -- shock me. uber raised a lot of money and has been an extremely successful company. emily: are there other companies that are getting left behind? >> companies rather than raising money on what they might do, will be raising money on what they have done. iposill probably see more over the next few months. it has essentially been zero over the past 10 months. emily: there is a presidential election happening now, and i am curious what you think hillary clinton and donald trump mean for silicon valley? >> that is a good question. i am not super-political. i hope that whichever leader which is collectively becomes a lot more thoughtful about the issues and less

headline-grabbing and more leadership. and, i am not convinced that we are at that place yet. emily: what do you mean? >> i think we all need to get involved, informed on the issues. there are some really important and tragic things going on in the world right now, and we need to be informed about those things. just bigger online and that yellowed each other over facebook or twitter but instead actually look at the plans and proposals and decide what makes sense for you and your family and your life and your friends. and at least vote. maybe, do more than that. emily:gv ceo, always great to have you on the show. thank you for stopping by. microsoft acquired linkedin. we asked those to speak on this. listen in. >> i see this as an opportunity for microsoft to expand.

it will depend a lot upon the of how much is it integrated and how much is it not. >> the trick is, can you encourage them to keep its own culture and, you know, still get some benefits? because obviously, people, if they never talk to anyone at microsoft, what is the point? right? that balance is tricky. >> microsoft might even take bigger risks as opposed to being a come -- a public company that needs to report quarterly. teamnk that the linkedin can really think now is the time to really take bigger risks. emily: coming up, the legendary bc aiming for infinity and beyond. the futuristic funding of the space energy, next. twitter is going to be just fine. our in-depth conversation with the venture capitalist later this evening. we are live at the bloomberg conference in san francisco.

♪

♪ emily: this is a special edition of "bloomberg west," live at the bloomberg technology conference where we have been speaking with the biggest names in silicon valley. one thing we are watching, the private equity centers making it to the final round of buying yahoo!. this according to the people familiar with the matter. they say it is between 5 billion and $6 billion. verizon, at&t and quicken loans founder dan gilbert are also in the running. a winning bidder could be chosen

next month. now, to the final frontier. it is becoming routine for elon to land a rocket on a barge in the middle of the ocean. the next test is wednesday. this is to slash because when millions of dollars and unlike our access for others to follow in his direction. another space start up for the planet to is trying to do for the satellite business was spacex is doing for rockets. they are trying to track things like illegal deforestation or the growth of refugee camps. both linux and lannett are backed by legendary investors steve jarvis in the very good friend of elon musk. he joins is now here. thank you so much for coming to the conference, steve. it sounds really cool, but tell me to business piece. how does this company make money over the long term? >> when you can scan the entire planet every day and see every part, every day, there is a lot

of customers that would pay for the imagery, largely the agricultural sector, national services. they want to monitor the earth. they want to know how crops are doing. they want to measure growth and see where things are heading. it they want to know how crops are doing, in the future that will grow dramatically when you have all of the data, not just where you are pointing satellites, being able to count every car in every parking lot, or as they plan to do, plan to every tree on the planet every single day for environmental monitoring. emily: there is a company that is not been kind by the public markets. >> they are attached to the international space station which is kind of a dead-end in the long run. you have a single camera and that is not much you can do with it. in contrast, we have launched 130 satellites and they will be launching several hundred more this year. they are kind of like the internet to a mainframe. there are swarms of satellites around the planet. emily: spacex has had a string of successful launches lately and they are planning their first reusable launch. tell me about that plan. >> it is the most important plan.

imagine after everyone way flight of the airplane, flying from here to europe, the airplane flying back, it would cost you many hundreds of billions of dollars to fly anywhere.

that is what is happening to the rocket industry. if we could use a reusable rocket, it would be like air flight, inexpensive as air flight. that is exactly what spacex is doing by taking an enormous piece of equipment and find it -- flying it many times. emily: who do you think is the biggest competition? >> china and russia. they have an interesting tourism business which is going up and falling back down. it takes 25 more times energy to get into orbit. that is a different business. emily: things have gotten worse outside for the company. what kind of conversations are you having? >> i am interested in seeing jennifer lawrence player in the upcoming movie. it is a kind of hunger games we can all look forward to. emily: i am excited to see the movie as well. bill mirus does not think there

is hope. is there? >> i cannot talk about that. she had big dreams and we are wishing her an oscar as well but we are not in the position to comment. emily: are we living in somebody else's simulation? elon musk said there is a one in a billion chance that we are living in someone else's reality. we have heard from others. what do you think? >> i think it is a fascinating subject, one of the deep philosophical subjects for anyone studying science fiction. i have had a lot of conversations with elon over the years and there is something that we have a limit to our ability to explore the world come of the other solar systems of our universe the way a game designer when designer, that we will never get there in our lifetime. if you look at these smaller and smaller scales, there is a fundamental limit to studying our world. why is that? maybe because we live in a simulation. that is about as far as the proof goes. emily: you have spoke to elon about this over the years. where do you agree with and where you disagree? >> everything in our world is a computation. a form of mathematical complexity. whether you think of the world or you think of

the world is fractal. everything is a mathematical construct. everything is exchangeable as a simulation. may bemmersed in what different than living in a single reality. that is where the philosophical questions come into play when you think about virtual reality. how does your brain that know anything other than what is being put into it? emily: does it matter? >> it might. it certainly motivates people with late-night conversations. emily: miller said if we are living in a simulation, we can turn it off and we realize we're living in a simulation. thank you as always for stopping by. i appreciate you joining us. >> said that is when neil breaks out of the matrix, right? emily up next, was the : microsoft-linkedin deal just because of the iceberg? we are live from the bloomberg technology conference here in san francisco. stay with us. ♪

♪ emily: this is a special edition live from the bloomberg technology conference in san francisco. we caught up with marc andreessen earlier today. i asked about the current state of silicon valley and companies like twitter. what is its future? take a listen. casenkedin is a great study. i remember linkedin, i was lucky enough to be an angel investor. somebody is going to need to use linkedin to find a new job. [laughter] >> is so, it was not that long ago, 2004, 2005. they built an amazing company over the last 12 years.

i will say, it is eliminate a lot of the guesswork on what these companies are worth. nobody pays $25 billion in cash for them and it is the result of an enormous amount of effort. it is a great business, great service. it has a lot of overlap with microsoft strategically because the window user base are effectively the same user base. i think they will be able to bring those together really interestingly. emily: how does it change the landscape? >> i think it is indicative of what is happening. as we see more mma in the pipeline, we see more negotiation and we have in four years. i think other agencies but agree with that. i think what is happens is one of the things or the markets have flow. a lot of public companies have kind of sat back and watched and watched all of the drama play out in the valley, constantly on

the bubble, bubble, bubble. there is a lot that should have happened that just did not happen. most big tech companies have piled up a lot of cash and have had very good business and then have to start shopping. you have to fill in gaps in their portfolio and then they can go shopping, they can buy these companies. i think it is indicative of many companies this day. i think there will be a whole lot of these next year and this year. emily: who is going to buy and it was going to get bought? >> i think that is a good question everyone has to deal with. we try to get them in a position where they can be a buyer. sometimes, you know, you get some of the comes along and makes you an offer and it is strategic and make sense. american tech companies are in a good position to buy. we are seeing a lot more nontraditional buyers, so a lot more of the fortune 500 outsider tax that are going --techs that are going shopping, the car industry was quite inquisitive and other kind of consumer products companies got inquisitive, clothing companies.

there will be a run of acquisitions with nontraditional buyers. emily: twitter, is that wishful thinking? >> a big part of how we think about a business is the new york alto arbitrage. i think the new york view is that if we think it is bought, it makes what are more likely to get bought. there is probably one fewer buyer. the acquisition of twitter is slightly less likely, but i am positive they are big companies thinking about it and positive twitter is thinking about it. emily: twitter is now the only other public social network aside from facebook. can twitter survive? >> twitter can survive. it has an amazing accomplishment over the last 12 years, building

up assets. they have built a great business. there is no question. they can generate profit anytime they want. it is just a question on how they want to turn the dials to make it all work. they have a strategy to do a lot of new things. i think they can survive just fine. they can be around indefinitely. think the question more is, tech companies are a little bit like sharks. they tend to move forward or backwards, tend to not stay still. i think the question of twitter that people are asking is, ok, under his leadership what are the new things they are going to do? emily: marc andreessen. how well tech change the future of combat? that is next.

if you like bloomberg, you can listen on the bloomberg app. ♪

>> it was more a psychological factor of seeing the 616. we are looking at dollars, obviously. we have seen a little bit of strengthening in the chinese currency. it does not seem like a lot in the greater scheme of things. , more oryou back to less, a 5.5 level low. we will have a look at where we are overall. picture.he

asian equities at the moment, i emphasize this, four-day losing streak. exactly 24 hours, roughly to the boj. we'll see how that pans out. a big day. a big day for markets here in asia. ♪ emily: net this is a special liveon of "bloomberg west" at from a san francisco. cutting edge research. [inaudible]d] -- "inaudible

>> when we look at the art of technology, it is random. technology has allowed us to get better. that is what we worked on. it allows a better understanding. to make better decisions. emily: how are you looking at analytic data. [inaudible]-

>> gun culture and experiments. we were looking at this 10 years ago. to see it start to make a big difference, that is encouraging. we are starting to look at what our military application was and how do we have understanding of larger intelligence? how do you ask a computer, why are you making the decisions you are making? we need a deeper understanding so having a system will allow us to utilize technology. >> gps, the internet, the use of gps for position of vehicles and communication in a war or nuclear war. how important is some of the technology? do you think about that when you make choices as to watch products to graft -- which products to go after? >> we are 10 or 15 years out ahead. i get to actually be out ahead

of what you are seeing. when we see an emergent like self driving cars, we were there in 2004. we can move beyond that. we do not have to do that. we are empowering wireless systems. how do we attack the human driven cycle, how to re-attack that for machines? we are able to prove what machine learning can do on a big, national scale. emily: what is the future of drones not just on the battlefield but in our world? he thinks and five years we will look up in the sky will be covered in them. >> i agree with him. emily: five years? >> i think it regulations are very difficult. security threats are numerous and their. re. we are working on regulation.

we can also work on technology, not having to rely only on regulation. you can rightfully control a system so when things go bad you do not have problems that you otherwise would. gps is cut off, what are the eyes and ears? >> you have every robotic sector available, self driving car, robotics. >> the more they hire, the more people want to go. all it is is creating demand. you can fill the pipeline very quickly. that is our goal. we want to empower universities in the military and also with commercial so the rest of the world wants to come here. emily: the governments are getting much better with technology. are we thinking about what is happening in china and what is happening in russia? >> it is growing every year. these are things we were involved in early, the internet, self driving cars. people quit their careers and work for the government and find big opportunities. other countries have yet to be able to replicate this moderately successful. >> every robotics expert getting

hired. [indiscernible] >> you can fill the pipeline very quickly. exactly the goal. toowering universities military also and commercial -- , indiscernible]

>> it is more fierce every year. however, every country, right? someplace like las vegas. driving cars. gps. these were things we are involved in early. asking people to quit their careers to work for the government. they want to do that because -- but other countries have yet to [indiscernible] the sleeping turkey is unaware of their environment.

so you are either asleep, or you fall out of bed and wake up. the actually wake them up when they are needed. we are studying things that are aware of the environment that they have. that is an enabled it internet. you have 500 devices. batteries are going to be changed. you will have a revolution. no power system. to unlock the internet. corey: that is cool. emily: yes, really cool. thank you so much for joining us. corey, our editor-not-large. thank you for stopping by. another big scene at the bloomberg conference has been the future of invention. we have some of the biggest names to weigh in on artificial intelligence.

it was a common theme. take a listen. >> the impact of what people are calling artificial intelligence and machine learning, that is pretty hard to beat in terms of stuff on an everyday basis god, it not like, oh my does everything for me but just incrementally. five years from now, we will be relying on automatic services for a larger set of things. >> the obvious answer would be artificial intelligence would be number one in the rest would be second-tier. >> i think ai is one of the fundamental capabilities that will separate companies into it a couple of tiers. because if you think about it, when artificial intelligence gets far enough along, instead of hiring an engineer you can actually make them. emily: coming up, how do we

defend against copycats? we speak to the director of the patent office. stay with us. we are live at the bloomberg tech conference in san francisco. ♪

♪ emily: welcome back to "bloomberg west." we asked the twitter chairman about the special takeover target. >> the board, you have to be accountable to the shareholders and you go after every opportunity, but as a management team and leader of the company, you are focused on doing a great job every day and doing a better job every day. most of the company will be

innovating and refining the product and a live streaming and doing this fantastic job that the service does which is really connected to the world and understanding of what is happening every moment come alive, -- moment, live. all of that is something you have to have an understanding of every day. that is our focus. whatever may play out, a partnership or other opportunities. we will evaluate it. emily: speaking of twitter, the company is expected to invest $70 billion. twitter wanted to buy the music service -- $70 million. twitter wanted to buy the music service. giving soundcloud a value of $700 million.

we have a director of the u.s. patent and trademark office. he was nominated for the position by president obama. he served as deputy counsel at google. michelle, i want to start off with this idea, do patents still matter? you see elon musk with his patents, google. should companies be filing? >> absolutely. patents still matter. if people do not have confidence in their investments, the research and development, the ability to bring it to the marketplace, their ideas. emily: you think these should accelerate innovation and not stifle? >> increased funding by venture capital, increased economic capability of startups, yes. >> what is the bigger threat to innovation, is a copycats or the idea of entities that have massed patents and use them against companies that is doing something that is truly innovative? >> certainly copycats, taking someone else's property works against innovation. we spent some much effort across

the globe. the united states is pretty strong. for the most part, companies and individuals respect intelligent property. that is not true across the globe. in this day and age, the landscape varies a lot and some companies take advantage of the market and need to have the confidence to ship the product overseas and that would is not stolen. emily: we have been talking

throughout the show about how other companies, especially china are becoming more technologically advanced. >> they are. countries across the globe view intellectual property as an economic development tool so they view intellectual system as a necessary step in innovation. china is different. they do not want to be a low-cost manufacturer of other people's inventions. they want to be higher up the value chain and they want their own inventions to increase and to raise high-value products and services. even china is saying, we need to respect intellectual property rights and have the appropriate remedy built into the products. >> do you see them actively going after that infringement? does an american company feel the freedom to go and operate in china in a way that not everything is going to get ripped off? >> they have additional work to do but i had meetings with public officials in china and there is a strong interest in changing the laws, improving the laws, the court system and really looking to us for guidance and help to help them get to where they want to get in an economic manner. emily: i want to talk about the gender gap.

it is even more pronounced when you look at whose names are on the inventions. how bad is it? >> i had the privilege of serving as the first woman director. i was curious about that question. i asked my team, how many patents are going to women? fewer than 15% of those us-based inventors were women. emily: that is even less than the number of women in tech school. >> clearly we have further to go. at the current rate it will take 140 years before we reach parity between men and women listed as inventors on patents. >> two questions of what you are seeing in the pipeline.

you get to review the applications. what are you doing to ensure we are not granting patents for insignificant advances and, what are you doing, what kind of technologies are you seeing that are going to be the big, new technologies of tomorrow? >> so many areas. many of the world's innovations come to our office because the u.s. market is so critically important. so many areas of innovation in cancer research, driverless cars, drones. those of the high-level but even basic issues. i do not see a shortage of innovation in our society or country and i view that as a good thing. i think this is a good problem to have. i, very positive trends as see them. >> what is your rejection rate?

what is your mechanism to make sure we are not granting frivolous patents? >> we cannot just grant patents. we have to apply the law. there is a statue. they're all legal requirements for inventions that are obvious, not novel, if they do not fall within a certain statutory level they are not eligible. there are strict requirements and our job is to faithfully apply the law and the statute and if you do not think a patent should have been issued and we issued it incorrectly, we allow you to bring it back into the law office in for a lower cost and a quicker resolution that district litigation, we will remove the patent. >> what are your goals, what can you say are your top priorities before the administration changes. >> that is like asking who your favorite child is. [laughter] >> i want a comprehensive quality initiative. i realize having come from the private sector and spent my entire career inside the private

sector giving with intellectual property, there is a cost to patent if we issue a that should not have been issued, just as if we do not issue a patent that should have been issued. i want to make sure we are accurately issuing patents. even more importantly, making sure that the boundaries are clear so that businesses can make decisions and correct decisions. emily: director of the u.s. patent and trademark office. you so much for joining us on the show and coming to the conference. thank you. tomorrow, our special coverage of the federal reserve's it is policy decisions starting 1:00 p.m. new york time.

♪ emily: we are live from the

bloomberg technology conference in san francisco and we have been asking some of the top names in technology their thoughts and the changing landscape of silicon valley. take a listen. >> we have really become almost a tourist destination for innovation in the world. >> 75% is in this country and about 20% of the present is in china and the rest is in europe and india. of course, there is israel, bangalore, berlin and london and new york and a few other places, but the majority of success and value is still in silicon valley. >> what silicon valley has learned is if you try to go do some ambitious thing, you might fail. a bunch of you might fail, but

ultimately you can succeed enormously well. emily: it is time to find out who is having the best day ever in today's winner is open internet supporters in the united states. the u.s. court of appeals upheld a net neutrality, a significant win for president obama and a blow to opponents like at&t. this is meant to prevent service providers for charging different rates for faster internet speed. google has championed the idea of an open internet while verizon says it discourages the innovation. the decision will likely stand because of the high court or split between liberal and sincevative justices antonin scalia's death. that does it for a special edition of "bloomberg west" live from the technology conference

in san francisco. that is all today from san francisco. ♪

♪ manus: oil heading for its longest decline since february. its rise from a 12 year low faltering on signs that higher prices will encourage more production. rishaad: chinese strongest rejected -- chinese stocks rejected by msci. beijing says the index without china is incomplete. preparing a big order