♪ caroline: i am caroline hyde. this is the "best of bloomberg technology," where we bring you our top interviews this week in tech. coming up, elon musk is looking to raise $1 billion to bring his model three to the market. plus, intel hit the ignition switch for its dream to create a self driving car with a $15 billion acquisition. another twist in a massive 2014 yahoo! hack. russian officials blame russian intelligence.

first, our lead story. elon musk needs to raise $1.15 billion to bring his model three to market. his believers could hardly be happier. tesla shares rose on the news. elon musk is personally participating at purchasing $25 million of common stock. we caught up with a bullish analyst and bloomberg's david welsh. >> analysts are skeptical. yesterday, after this, some think he's still going to have to go back and get more money. one possible explanation is it will be a soft launch of the model three. in other words, later in the year, we will not see a lot of production of the car, so they will not be building it so rapidly. they will be building production more quickly next year when they need to come back for more money.

>> from the analyst perspective, jamie from consumer edge research, are you convinced $1.5 billion is enough? they are burning like mad. >> thank you for having me. i don't think it is enough. there is a lot of positive sentiment among the investment community looking ahead to the model three launch. the other just here mentioned -- his comment was accurate. we will see a continued spend as the model three progresses from an initial soft launch at the 2018 as they work their way towards 500,000 units. i'm surprised they did not take this opportunity to raise more capital and put that risk off into the future. >> david, there might be

potentially a slightly larger than $1.15 billion capitalization in the market, but what about the money that elon musk himself is putting behind this deal? he is the number one stockholder in tesla, and now he is buying a little bit more. >> sure, he's buying another $25 million of stock which is not a lot. that is what he does. he borrows money and secures it against his own shares in the company. he does not take a salary, so the money he borrows from his underwriters is what he is living on. he continues to buy more shares, and he has a lot of skin in the game. investors like that. that is something investors have admired about him. he will probably need to come back and get more money, and investors are prepared for it. maybe it is a matter of waiting until the model three cash really starts to stretch out, and then have to go back to the market again. >> looking at your price target,

it is pretty bullish. you think the price could rise further. does this mean there has to be a really smooth process with the model three coming onto market? or have you factored in any other risk factors here? >> i think it has to be reasonably smooth. i don't know if it slips from the third quarter into the fourth quarter that it is sort of game over, but they have talked about the back half of the year, so there is implication there will be some in the third quarter. investors are polling suppliers to make sure they are on track to keep up with that third quarter soft launch or otherwise. so, the risk factor is they don't hit that target. that could be a negative catalyst. clearly, there will be more cash burn, as there always is with a new product at an auto manufacturer. i look at the quarterly results as an opportunity for bears to

sink in and say look at all this cash going out the door. we do not know where it is going. it is more than we thought for the model three. that is where you have to take a more balanced view. they are spending more money on the model three, but they are spending money to expand globally. quite frankly, 10% to 15% of what they are spending is on projects and products we have not heard about yet. i think there is more negative catalyst around the quarters and the model three hitting that third-quarter target. caroline: another top story, the u.s. government indicted for -- four people for hacking yahoo! accounts for the russian government. justice department officials charged two russian intelligence agents and a pair of hackers. u.s. officials explain the charges and a news conference on wednesday. >> targeted yahoo! accounts of russian and government officials

including cybersecurity, diplomatic, and military personnel. they also targeted russian journalist, numerous employees of other providers whose networks the conspirators soft -- sought to exploit, and employees of financial services and other commercial entities. caroline: we spoke with mike riley who covers cybersecurity for us. >> there are a lot of things going on. this is the russia equivalent to the indictments the doj released against the pla hackers. it is their effort to paint a picture of how russian intelligence is cooperating with criminal hackers that help them hide intelligence gathering operations, but also much more -- also help them to be much more effective than they are on their own. it is a devastating picture of what happened inside yahoo!. these guys got access to internal systems that allow them to create encrypted cookies and therefore access any user's actual email account anytime

they wanted over a period of years. they have indicted two fsb agents, basically russian spies, and two criminal hackers who they say were handled by the spies, given tasks, given missions, told to get information on people inside russia and outside russia, and, when they came back with information, they got paid for it. >> of course, this is something spearheaded a while ago, probably by obama when he was president, now this has been followed through and completed by donald trump as president. someone who has been offering all of branches to russia. is that a help or a hindrance? >> that is the interesting question that will play out in the next couple of weeks or months. in fact, some people were saying this is something that the obama administration left for the trump white house. they did not pull the trigger on

it before they departed the white house, and they left it for trump to make that decision. it would have been hard from a political point of view for trump not to pull a trigger on something like this, because the case was pretty well documented. if you do, then there is the possibility it upsets this reset with russia you are trying to do. there is no doubt that vladimir putin will not hand over two of his spies to the u.s. government, and i doubt people in the kremlin are happy this is going on. so, the question is -- what will trump do now with his effort to build a new kind of bridge to russia? >> it does pull back the curtain of what russia has been doing in terms of using illegal or criminal hackers by their own spy institutions. does it delve anymore into the hacking that was laid at russia's feet in the run up to the election? >> the department of justice officials are saying the cases

are unrelated, but they are related in the way you suggest -- which is the indictment is really detailed and does pull back the curtain on russia's entire cyber operations. especially one of the unique aspects which is the way they use cyber criminals in order to do things for the intelligence agencies. in one of the cases, one of the two hackers, there was evidence that emerged that they were doing illegal acts in cyberspace, and the fsb, rather than picking them up and prosecuting them, use that over their heads and said, "you will either go to jail or work for us." they became a recruit that help their operations on a global scale. caroline: this week, gopro spiked after the company announced a second round of job cuts. gopro already slashed its workforce by 200 or the equivalent of 15% back in november. now, it is cutting another 270 positions. the move is meant to reduce costs.

gopro also says its forecast for first-quarter revenue will be on the upper end of its guidance, between $190 million and $210 million, and it will make a profit this year. still to come, intel's $15 billion deal could be a boost for the israeli tech scene. we will explain coming next. plus, we speak with a massachusetts attorney general on president trump's continued push for a travel ban. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ caroline: now to intel spending $15 billion for a foothold in the self-driving car market. it is buying israeli company mobileye. it is the second largest acquisition for intel, and the largest ever for an israeli company. shares for mobileye surged on

the news. as part of the deal, intel will move its existing car tech operations to israel. bloomberg editor at large cory johnson caught up with reinke signage and ask him about that decision and its associated cost figure. >> we built about 100 and $75 million -- $175 million in synergies into this deal. we were going to move our autonomous driving resources to israel where mobileye is centered. there is a lot of overlap between the two companies, and that will bring those synergies to that $175 million over time. cory: there was a lot of options trading in the days before this deal was announced, and i should say purchase of calls. expectations the stock was going to go higher and really soon. it seemed to be near record

levels for mobileye. i wonder how long you have been working on this deal and if this concerns you at all? >> we have been working on this deal for a while, but we take a lot of care with the bankers we work with and the pr teams to keep this quiet. if you take a look, it has been pretty quiet relative to other deals out there, and so we were pretty comfortable with the level of secrecy we were able to keep until the last 12 to 24 hours. we took a look at what we were doing and what was going on in the market. it seemed like everything was pretty okay from that perspective. cory: expectations of changes in tax policy could lead to m&a and technologies. is that one of the reasons why you wanted to get this deal done now?

>> no, we would never do m&a as result of something like that. we are always going to target around the technologies and a -- and doing technologies at the right time relative to bringing those products to market. we started these discussions before the elections to give some clarity on just how long we take. we had nothing to do with what the tax policies were. this was about getting these two technologies together to provide solutions. caroline: that was the intel ceo reinke signage. intel noted in the announcement that mobileye operations will stay where they are. prime minister benjamin netanyahu of israel tweeted, "congratulations mobileye, israeli genius, israeli pride." while it is the biggest acquisition of an israeli tech firm, it is not the first. joining us now for more context on the israeli tech scene are two venture capitalists in new york.

thank you very much indeed for joining us, both of you. you are helping to manage israeli companies on the syndicate list. tell us how big is the scene. >> i think that's right. this seminal book on the israeli startup nation was written in 2009, so the story isn't new, but i believe the world still has no idea about the innovation and shareholder value creation that will come out of israel in the coming years. caroline: give us some stats. i know you have some great ones in terms of the sheer amount of ipo's per person. >> when the book was written in 2009, it was written based on any stat you looked at, the number of startups per capita, the number of exits, israel was crushing the rest of the world. here in the u.s., on the nasdaq

for instance, israel leads all the other countries in the world on a per capita basis. it is more than two times the number of ipos on the nasdaq versus canada, and it is more than 100 times on a per capita basis the number of ipo's out of china. so, what is happening in israel is really quite amazing. caroline: you founded the california-israeli chamber of commerce and are helping to build bridges between silicon valley and israel. i find it fascinating that intel got in on another company. they got one of the largest in israel. just how much does silicon valley already know israel? >> first of all, we are based in silicon valley and invested in over 60 companies in israel. it is no surprise i think that all eyes are on israel. it has been that way for more than 20 years.

if you look at some of the leading companies that are based here out of israel, whether checkpoint or others, companies that are innovating in both the hardware as well as the software space, then you see also that a lot of the local funds and investors are looking to israel for innovation. so, we have created a lot of waves with its acquisition, and i think that mobileye is not a big surprise. in 2016 alone, almost $5 billion was invested into israel and -- into israel in capital, so there is a lot of infusion of capital, and there is a lot of interest in the innovation that is going into israel today. caroline: where is it going for example?

what are the key areas of growth do you think for israel? >> nds was a tv set top, and the majority of the value was in the cybersecurity, the encryption of nds. if you look at the major areas, cybersecurity is one of the amazing areas. i think also there are a lot of areas that come out of what i described as imaging. so, it started with satellite imaging in the 1950's so israel could see what their neighbors were up to, and now they have some of the greatest photo companies. there is an amazing company called light tricks doing amazing things with photography. there are amazing companies in video,in ar, and vr. that same technology is in the

autonomous car, the lidar technology out of mobileye, is that same technology. caroline: we have been hearing about how active the ipos scene is from nasdaq for person and israel killing it there, but do they need more ipos? to put it largely on the map, most of it seems to be m&a. >> true, a lot of the great technologies today are being acquired, and if you look at the israeli system, the biggest question outside israel is -- can israel produce massive companies? that is always the question on the mind. can they scale? can companies start but also scale globally and create impact?

caroline: meanwhile, uber competitor halo is coming to a full stop in london. customers are now being encouraged to switch to another ride hailing app. the hamburg-based company has more than 70,000 drivers who use halo system. halo users in london have until the end of may to switch. coming up, maryborough joins us on trump, emission standards, and regulations facing the auto industry. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ caroline: this week, a change of heart. after pulling the plug on a $230 million health care fund. he would now proceed with the smaller fund of $100 million named section 32.

emily chang spoke with him in december where he explained why he scrapped the plan. here, take a listen. >> i did this crazy thing called changing my mind. it is wild i know. i left hundreds of millions of dollars behind, but i did it, because i feel like there are a lot of venture funds in the valley right now. every couple of days, i feel like i see announcements of new funds. i felt like after 10 years in the business or close to it that there might be other ways to have a bigger impact. caroline: his new fund will have the same focus on biotech and health care startups and is expected to close later this month or early april. president trump was in michigan wednesday. he announced that the white house will reexamine fuel economy standards set by the obama administration. he signaled he was willing to cut automakers a break if they hire more workers in return. david westin caught up with the gm chair and ceo mary barra in

michigan, near ann arbor, and asked what she thought about the review. >> what really would happen is we would not be able to give customers the choice we give them today. they choose if they will buy an suv, a small car, or an electric vehicle. we are full range. we are continuing to invest in the chevrolet volt ev. we are proud of it. the chevrolet volt and its a second generation is doing very well, so we are making the investments, but at the end it is consumer choice. you and i have talked about it in the past. there is more change happening now in the industry than in the last 50 years. when you look at this legislation that was done five years ago before sharing, before we were talking about autonomous the way we talk about it now, so take a pause, be data-driven, and look at how we can improve the environment in the most effective way makes sense.

it is what we all agreed to in 2012. caroline: that was gm chair and ceo mary barra. meanwhile, uber drivers are fighting for benefits, and the question keeps arising -- do the drivers actually work for the ride hailing app? the has been the delay -- the debate in courts from l.a. to london. >> are uber drivers contractors or full-time employees? that is the battle uber is facing in courts all around the world as it aims to keep his -- it's drivers classified as contractors. why? uber claims it is not an employer. it is just a platform that connects drivers to customers. in a blog post, travis kalanick said, "uber drivers valued their independence as contractors. as such, uber is not responsible or paying drivers minimum wage, providing insurance, or providing holiday pay." many critics say uber drivers work more than 40 hours a week

and should be entitled to these benefits. in europe on wednesday, paris tribunal dismissed the request for uber to make social security payments to drivers. this after the u.k. world uber drivers should get holiday pay. uber and its rival lyft are arguing that drivers are contractors, preventing drivers from unionizing and collecting benefits from overtime pay. lyft told bloomberg news its it's drivers are federal -- independent contractors, and federal law prohibits independent contractors from collective bargaining. undercurrents yet a lot -- undercurrents seattle lawundercurrents seattle law, uber and lyft would have to provide drivers names to the union. caroline: trump's travel ban blocked again. we speak to the massachusetts attorney general ahead. all episodes of bloomberg are

live streaming on twitter. check us out at @bloombergtechtv at 5:00 p.m. in new york, and 2:00 p.m. in san francisco. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> this week, a rebuttal of the repost travel band. -- this week, we saw a rebuttal of round two of president trump's travel ban. a federal judge in hawaii halted the ban hours before it was set to take effect. a maryland judge followed suit hours later. we caught up with massachusetts attorney general maura healey on wednesday, ahead of those rulings, for an exclusive interview from boston. >> it is what it has always been, which is a muslim ban, and more than being unconstitutional and discriminatory, what this

also is it something that is causing a tremendous amount of uncertainty and creating real harm for businesses, research institutions, colleges and universities, and for major tech companies across this land. and that is one of the reasons why we filed suit weeks ago and renewed our lawsuit earlier this week, joining with hawaii, washington state, new york, and others -- we had standing alongside us leaders from the tech community and business who say this is wrong and this order has got to go. you mentioned you say a lot of it is still discriminatory, but a lot of that thesis is based on past statements from the election campaign made by donald trump. how do you distinguish between what was said in the past and the current writing of the executive order? >> he has still created a serious issue in denying visas and creating uncertainty about whether visas will be renewed.

we have tech companies here in a massachusetts who are employing employees that have a those visas. we have students at major research institutions who don't know whether they will be able to stay on and continue their fellowship. this order create problems for those already working in this country to create a vibrant tech community and industry. it is why i have spoken with so many business leaders and leaders in tech and researchers who say this order is bad for us and needs to go. caroline: boston is such a thriving tech area. it is a biotech hub. such an area of growth in terms of the talent needed there.

what are the businesses you are speaking to say they will have to do if it does indeed stand? do you know what the alternative will be? >> they are standing alongside us and challenging this discriminatory travel ban. not only is it unconstitutional, but it makes no sense. in speaking with heads of our major hospital institutions and research institutions, they right now do not know if they can go ahead and bring over the research fellows and professors who have been hired who want to come over and do scholarship here. they have people who work for them as researchers and professors who they don't know

if they can continue to keep on because they don't know if they will be allowed to fulfill contractual obligations given the president's order. so, this creates all sorts of havoc. tech, life sciences, biotech, they are the driving force in massachusetts, and they are also a driving force in other regions of the country. you were just talking about silicon valley. this hurts and has economic impact. it is why you have seen not only states come forward and challenge what the president has done it, but you also see major businesses and industries come forward and say this is wrong. not only is it not american and consistent with who we are as a nation, you think about the amazing companies that have been built by immigrants, but it is also counterproductive and harmful to our business interests. caroline: but is it unconstitutional? >> absolutely. i think our arguments are well made and have an heard and -- and have been heard in multiple courts today. i am glad we will soon see a decision from the hawaii district court. other cases are ongoing and we will continue to press ahead and

fight this right to the end because it is unconstitutional. caroline: i am going to ask you again, because you mentioned about what happens if -- if the legal challenge does not work. have you got any ways in which you can legally bypass this executive order? >> unfortunately, immigration issues and the control of people coming into and out of our country is controlled at the federal level. it is why we are challenging to say the right thing needs to happen here. no federal determination, no policy, no president is above the law, so we are looking to the courts now to uphold the rule of law, uphold the constitution. we will await the court's decision, but stand at the ready to stand up for residents, businesses, industry here in our state and across this country, but make a mistake about it, president trump has issued a second order. it does not change the

fundamental flaws with this order. it is discriminatory based on religion and national origin. as you know, national security experts have discredited this to say this is not what you are looking for if you want to deal with issues of terrorism. caroline: that was massachusetts attorney general maura healey. meantime, president has tweeted out he may have been wiretapped. in addition, a house intelligence committee has asked the government for any evidence by this coming monday. bloomberg's david gura spoke with michael hayden and asked how confident he is that any evidence will actually come to light. >> i am confident we will know by monday of next week that there is no evidence.

my instincts are really, really powerful on this. i know how this works. i know how you get a fisa, how the u.s. government gets the authority to listen in on the phone calls of a u.s. person. none of those things are suggested by what the president tweeted out about 10 days ago. it just doesn't happen that way. the president hasn't had the authority to order such a thing for about 40 years. you have to go to a court, and there is no evidence that happened, because the guy who would have gone to the court -- james comey and james clapper, have each said they did not do that. >> if it didn't happen and there is no evidence it happened, what should be consequences be? >> we have party suffered a lot of damage, because the intelligence community knows it

not to be true. this is what they do for a living. so, it is one more logged on that fire that seems to be holding -- the confrontation between the new administration and the intelligence community. i would just suggest as a member of the old community and a concerned citizen, everyone take a deep rest and back away from this. the president needs the intelligence community, and the intelligence community knows their only purpose is to help him succeed. david: so there is this cash of information that wikileaks say is hacking data from the cia. what recourse does this administration have against wikileaks? >> they really are in a problematic situation. i think wikileaks has proven themselves to be an enemy of the united states of america, and by that my definition is they are doing things whose only purpose can be to harm america, america's friends, and the way america keeps itself and its friends safe. if it were good answers, david, an order to shut this thing down, we would have exercised those answers already.

i think we just keep plugging away. one thought i had, and it really -- and i really cannot claim i have explored it -- have we enacted any consequences against ecuador for giving julian assange sanctuary in the ecuadorian embassy in london? we are not required to make life as comfortable as possible for the ecuadorian government. david: we are expecting an executive order on cybersecurity from the white house, expected, but delayed. if you were to talk to the white house, what would you say is per 31 when it comes to cybersecurity? david: i have seen some drafts of that order, and i think it is quite good. it puts tasking out into the federal bureaucracy with short timelines to come back and tell me how you are going to do these things.

if you are looking for a philosopher's stone, i think the key is that our success or failure in cybersecurity is going to be more dependent on the success of american private industry and the private sector than anything the u.s. government is able to do on itself. so, i would counsel the president -- think of things that unleash, liberate, get out of the way of the private sector doing things only the private sector can do when it comes to cybersecurity. caroline: that was david gura speaking with a former cia director michael hayden. coming up, our exclusive conversation with the node khosla and the ceo and cofounder of rubric. if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. you can now listen on the bloomberg radio app, bloomberg.com, and in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

caroline: a story we are

watching -- germany is threatening to fine social networks like facebook more than $50 million if they fail to give users the option to complain about hate speech or fake news. the punishment would apply if the company also refused to remove illegal content. if passed, it would be the steepest challenge facebook faces in any country where it operates. the move comes as germany prepares for september elections, and the government is under pressure to curb the spread of fake news. now, will 2017 be a big year for tech ipo's? we have already seen snaps volatile ipo, and we are waiting on other countries to go public. -- companies to go ahead. we spoke exclusively with vinod khosla, partner at lightspeed

ventures and ceo of rubric, and i asked if now is the time to go public. lightspeed ventures was the first institution to back snap, and vinod khosla is an investor in okta. >> what you are seeing is that high companies with a real business model and a path to profitability and long-term sustainability are the companies going public. not every company is going public. we still feel the bar is high, but we have a number of

companies with differentiate product getting into the marketplace. caroline: when you have your viewpoint as chief executive of rubric, you are looking at these companies that have followed on from snap. is it time for rubric to look at the public market? >> we are probably two years away from the public market, but are building a company to become a public company in long term sustainable business. i think fundamentals of enterprise business and selling into the larger end of the market and driving six figures, seven figures, eight figure deals is one side of the enterprise business. so, we are focused on fortune 500, global 2000 companies, where they have a real need around cloud, date of orchestration, data management, data security. caroline: when you're looking at your portfolio of companies, we have some juggernauts with proven business models and already bringing in revenue. uber and airbnb, dropbox.

what needs to happen? do these companies need to come to the market? is it up to the investor base to say the time is now? or do you like companies remaining private? >> a choice of whether a company stays private or goes public is entirely with the entrepreneurs. there is some flexibility to do some things when you get to the public markets. you need to be predictable and set long-term goals. entrepreneurial companies like rubric change strategy continuously. they are a very young company at only three years old. so, you want that lets ability to change. with private investors, it is much easier to do. when you get to a highly predictable stage, then an entrepreneur can choose to go public or not. we always support entrepreneurs in their choice. caroline: you never apply any pressure? >> almost never really. it is the wrong thing to do, apply treasure. caroline: you don't need exits? you must have your own needs? >> i am proud of the fact that we never worry about exits. they happened when they happen. they happen often enough, but we almost never worry about it. i have a rule, if someone talks about exits when we are investing, we won't invest in a company that talks about exits. >> fascinating. >> it is the wrong approach to building really durable long

companies, thinking about exits. i would rather have somebody trying to build really large companies over the long haul, and whether you get liquidity in one year or four years, it almost does not matter if you are building real value. caroline: you were saying before that you are an optimist. we have cloud as a driver, data as a driver, i want to know about some of the environments in which you work with in silicon valley and whether they help to foster optimism or not. particularly as it comes to the administration and the second iteration of the travel ban. do you worry about perhaps limitations to some of the immigration? >> i do worry about it. if people can't start a company here, they will move operations to india.

we are starting to see more and more people talking about building outside, because they cannot acquire the talent here. for educated talent, there's global competition. canada is dying to get more of this talent. the national foundation for american policy just issued a little thing that said 83% of the finalists in intel's science competition were born to immigrant parents. think about it. 83%. immigrants, especially well educated ones, renew our country, and countries that have gone into stasis like japan did so because they were so insular, so i think it is a huge advantage and has been a source of growth in america and vibrancy. caroline: you are a man growing your headquarters in silicon valet, but you are also growing internationally. is this something that worries you? how has it affected your business here or elsewhere? >> for us, the way we look at it is politics and these kind of rules will take care of itself.

i believe our country, the fundamentals are very strong in america. that we have rule of law and a structure that fosters innovation. so, i view this as a transient phenomenon were over time it things will take care of themselves. when we go international, we do business in 30 countries right now, and so far we have not seen any headwind in our growth or any kind of backlash because of it. caroline: h-1b visas, is that some thing you have used? >> we use h-1b visas on a case-by-case basis. there is a lottery system and very few people can get it. so, we think of a comprehensive strategy on where we get talent from, and how we grow our talent

pool. we are cognizant of h-1b visas and the number of applicants available and things like that, but we are thinking of this business as a long-term sustaining business with our sales and marketing around the world, and we are looking at innovation and saying how do we continue to drive innovation and bring people together on this mission to go change the data management platform for the multi-cloud world. caroline: where are you looking geographically if not in silicon valley? >> outside of silicon valley, there are plenty of exciting things going on in your, israel, india, -- in europe, israel, india, china. china is a whole different thing. we tend to not do a lot in china, but there are interesting things happen.

caroline: why not china? >> we have the geographic focus. we feel we don't understand how to do business in china. caroline: that was vinod khosla founder of khosla ventures and founder of rubric. we next head to boston, massachusetts where a company that sees the future of factories growing. more on that story next. this is bloomberg. ♪

caroline: ginkgo bioworks is at the forefront of bringing biology technology to the forefront. based in boston, the start of his building tools for a future where factories are powered by biology. the company is helping clients design flavors and fragrances by modifying the dna of microbes like yeast. we took a trip to their labs and got a behind-the-scenes look at the company. >> a team of phd's from m.i.t. started ginkgo bioworks in boston a few miles away. inside, they are building tools for a future where factories stop manufacturing goods and

start growing them. >> at the heart of biology is digital code in the form of dna. we have now the ability to read that code through dna sequencing and the ability to write that code with dna synthesis. if we can read and write code, we can program. can you program biology to make stuff? yes, because dna is code. >> before they can grow their own iphones, ginkgo is focusing on something similar -- reprogramming microbes to produce artificial flavors and scents. the company is working on that in this robot filled lab. >> so this is our second-generation lab. if you soon in, it looks like a regular academic lab, but if you soon out, you can see all the robotics. that's what we are trying to do here, make things move faster. >> right now, ginkgo is using genetically modified yeast to

create fragrances. they can then compare that with the dna and modify it to produce a similar smelling substance. the process then becomes a lot like brewing beer. they can extract out a peach sent for clients -- scent for clients. >> into these is a different gene combination that will make a slightly different smell. but soon what we have. >> it smells a little like vinegar which i think is the east. -- the yeast. >> samples that smell the past tests are destined to be inside perfume bottles, but once you start thinking about it, you can see this technology applied to

some unexpected places. >> what it this was a patch you could put on your skin, so your skin would produce your perfume so you don't have to spread yourself all the time. it is producing that sent on its own. a lot of the smells that you might associate with human bodies are actually are ready -- actually already coming from microbes. so a matching of those microbes might be a little different and make a different smell. it is not that hard to believe. >> things are looking good these days for ginkgo. they recently bought a dna splicing company and race $100 million from investors. it's too soon to say whether they will make the leap from perfume to electronics, but ginkgo sees its gene modified yeast as a first step to where they can make him us anything. -- make almost anything. >> we could use biology to make a semiconductor chip. its ability to place atoms is

superior to intel today. the applications for this are sort of endless. caroline: that does it for this edition of "best of bloomberg technology". next week, we speak week the ceo of oneweb discusses their merger. tune in each day at 5:00 p.m. in new york, 2:00 p.m. in san francisco. remember, all episodes of bloomberg technology are live streaming on twitter. check us out at @bloombergtechtv weekdays. that is all for now. this is bloomberg. ♪

carol: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek," i am carol massar. oliver: i am oliver renick. carol: trumpforce one ready for takeoff. domino's does some soul-searching and comes up with a new recipe for success. oliver: all that ahead on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ carol: we are with the editor- in-chief of bloomberg businessweek, megan murphy. you guys look at korea. there is a lot going on in south and north korea. megan: we ha sn