marc: you are watching bloomberg technology. theresa may praised the collective action by the u.s. and some european nations to expel russian diplomats. the move follows the poisoning of a former russian spy and his daughter on british soil. >> to do their we will send a message that we will not tolerate russia's continued attempts to defy international law and undermine our values. european nations will also act to strengthen their resilience to chemical, biological and nuclear related risks, as well as bolstering their kid abilities to deal with high risk threats. mark: the kremlin says russia

will likely respond quid pro quo to the expulsion of its diplomats and alleging that powerful forces in britain and the u.s. were behind the attack. moscow says britain has made european countries hostage of the anti-russian policy. for the russian foreign ministry says britain failed to provide any evidence to back the accusations of moscow's involvement. the north korean leader kim jong un pretty surprise visit to beijing today. this is according to three people with knowledge of the matter, who say it is not immediately clear how long kim will stay or who he is meeting. global news 24 hours a day, powered by 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries around the world. york, i am mark crumpton and bloomberg technology is next.

emily: i'm emily chang and this is bloomberg technology. stocks recover from the last week market row. facebook is under investigation, trying to weather the storm. can mark zuckerberg keep the advertisers and lawmakers happy? and uber agrees to sell the operations in of east asia to the local rival grab. we discuss what uber gets in return and the global plans for the world's biggest startup. first, to our lead, u.s. stocks surge with major benchmarks climbing more than 2% on an escalation of trade tensions easing. microsoft jumped 7%, the best one-day gain since october of 2015. abigail doolittle of new york,

walk us through the comeback. abigail: the bulls were certainly out today. what a day for the major averages and stocks, a rebound rally from a couple weeks of pressure, especially friday when we had bearish action. today the buyers were out buying the dip and encouraging perhaps, at least in the near term, the major averages, the nasdaq opened up about 2% and fell back from that a little bit positive all day. but then steadily climbing from late morning and a steadily climbing during the last 30 minutes of trading. some investors say the real buying and selling happens during the first 30 minutes and last 30 minutes of trading. during that minute, the bulls w ere out. the nasdaq, outperforming 3.8%. the best day since august of 2015 and it was all about tech, up 4%, day. this was led in part by

microsoft, up more than 7% on the day. morgan stanley had some very bullish comments, raising the price target to $130 per share, citing the possibility of improving growth and operating margins. that seemed to put a little bit of a floor for tech buyers. investors must be impressed. they must take the call seriously, but it really did again seem to help out technology overall because as you mentioned, we had other tech names trading higher, including apple and intel. we also had facebook, amazon, netflix and alphabet on the close all higher. that piece of the market action recovering as well and that is of course, 25% of the nasdaq 100, so a lot of high beta stocks trading higher today. a real reversal of last friday's action and the last couple weeks. that overall over the last couple weeks we are still lower. did a facebook and it

slightly higher, but not making up for the week of losses last week with stocks still down about 14% over the last seven days. why isn't facebook part of this rebound? is interesting, actually because facebook was down 6.5% as the official news came out that the ftc had launched a nonpublic probe into privacy issues around the with the company. investors are really selling the news, despite the fact that that was largely known. and a but surely, as the rally of the day seemed to grow, investors became more friendly to facebook. i am not sure it will last. this is a great chart on facebook. we see last year's beautiful uptrend in relation to the 200 day moving average in blue. this is similar to what we see with most of the major averages and on that news last monday, thiu -- this is bearish,

telling you the buyers were blindsided through the 200 day moving average. now you see facebook is dangling from the area of trading before this. this chart suggests we could see facebook go above 140, just over the possibility of fines and regulation, emily. emily: thank you, abigail. as we have been talking about facebook on track for the worst month since may of 2013, the fallout over the misuse of the data continues. the federal trade commission announced it is investigating the privacy practices. this in turn triggers a warning. this could "pause some facebook advertising campaigns until headlines a subside." we have the latest in facebook news. also with us from washington, the writer of corporate influence. how unusual is it for the ftc to actually confirm an open investigation? >> it is very rare for a federal

agency. come out and confirm what the target is, what the investigation is. this is unusual. there was a statement on the ftc website by the acting head of the bureau of consumer protection, which looks into the question about the user data. and it did acknowledge that they were very concerned about the revelations during the previous days and weeks and was going to look into them very seriously. emily: what do we know about how this ftc investigation might proceed? >> well -- [crosstalk] emily: sorry, there are two sarahs. sarah frier first. arah: remember, there was 2011 consent decree that

facebook had with the ftc where they had to alert users if the data was going to be used and get the explicit permission and if not, they could be fined. the ftc is likely looking at whether facebook deserves to be fine for the data that has ended up in the hands of third parties who did not have explicit consent to access it. interesting is, facebook, the social network can always put this back on users. well, you opted in, even if you did not quite understand what you are opting in for. how does that play into what the ftc is looking into? sara: as sarah mentioned, after the ftc did the 2011 consent they have got to get the express informed consent. users have got to be very careful with what they are agreeing to. what the ftc will look at and we will not have any updates along the way because they did say it is a nonpublic investigation, but they are going to go back

and look at how the data was transferred, first to the research firm and then to cambridge analytica. they will see a facebook wiley to the terms of the agreement. variousow, you now, lawmakers have been calling on mark zuckerberg to testify and he said he will testify if he is the right person. on theresentative judiciary committee had this to say about legislation. >> i believe legislation should be written in order to give the tech industries overall guidance from the united states congress, me, laws, and believe there are congress persons who are strong advocates with the strength of the tech industry, matching up with those who are strong constitutionalists, and out of that should come a bipartisan but his live initiative. -- bipartisan legislative initiative. emily: in the meantime, sarah

frier, mark zuckerberg has been asked to testify in april. is this going to happen? sarah: well, it is an invitation, not a subpoena. it is one of those invitations where zuckerberg can decide, is this something i want to do? if he decides he is not the right person, then they can escalate their ask and make it something more dramatic. fromhis particular ask bradley, who was calling on a google executive to come in to speak to these issues. it is not just about zuckerberg. a want to understand the broader scope of the problem here. the data collection these companies do on our behalf. a lot of it is happening in a way we are not fully aware of. emily: thank you, sarah frier and sara forden, thank you. coming up, uber selling its

operations to grab. if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. was in on the bloomberg radio app and in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: uber has agreed to sell the southeast asian operations to grab. grab will acquire all of the operations in the region of 620 million people, including uber eats and in return, they will take a 27.5% stake in a combined entity and the ceo will join the board of the singapore-based grab. i'm so serious about this deal, uber,this a win for

despite all of the money they might have lost investing here? they could not go it alone. having 27% of a local winner is not a bad deal. eric: given the existing valuations of ride-hailing companies, i think investing $700 million to get a huge chunk andeader -- in the region allianceorming an makes a lot of sense. it is good to have invested the money. whether it was good to have made the deal and abandoned the market is an open question. emily: so, dara will join the board. how does what happened in southeast asia compared to what happened in china? eric: i think in china there was more of a concern that there could be government intervention of some form, or there was more urgency to cut a deal in a way that southeast asia did feel like uber could have kept going if they were willing to foot the bill. this was more of a tactical , thatt been an assessment

a long-term local player would have advantages that uber would never have. emily: give us the bigger picture because there are only a couple of key battleground areas around the world. eric: exactly. uber is saying india, latin america, the middle east -- we are focusing -- we want to be the a in m&a. they want to acquire these other companies and dominate the other markets and not abandon them. there are clearly some sniping from former employees saying uber afteress global the deal. i think uber will have a tougher time negotiating with these other companies, given that they have shown a willingness to take a minority stake. there will be a lot of doubling down, especially in india, saying, we are not going away, you are not going to give a 30%

to get us out of the market. emily: interesting. eric newcomer, who covers uber and ridesharing for us, thank you. with one ofow grab's earliest investors, serving on the board. he was also involved in the uber-didi deal in china. is this a win for grab, giving the way we 7% of the company? -- giving away 27% of the company? >> i think it makes a lot of sense. what happened in china and southeast asia has you know, required a lot of investments and in some ways, a lot of wastage in the process. the consolidation does make a lot of sense. i think for both grab and uber in southeast asia. didink the threat ,what it

in china, both with didi and in southeast asia is a good deal for both companies. emily: uber also just got a huge investment from softbank, which has its hand in other ridesharing companies around the world and uber's competitor. how much is that playing a role in the decisions being made about strategic partnerships? think he is a very influential man. he has his stake in didi now. and from his perspective obviously, the consolidation makes a lot of sense. it,efinitely has a hand in in the entire process. i do think that the local services phil, it is going beyond the ridesharing.

if you look at what is happening in china, didi will face competition from the likes of the bike sharing services. the competition is not over yet. i think the consolidation is a step forward for grab and uber landing ontronger the local services. emily: if that is the case then, what would your message be to the new uber ceo dara khosrowshahi about latin america? hould he waved the white flag? jixun: i don't know enough about the markets to provide good advice, but certainly with what we have seen in southeast asia, the ridesharing service is actually a very local business.

and i think it has got to extend beyond this. you have got to offer a service on the platform. that includes the food delivery service. andbeijing and shanghai other cities in southeast asia, like think i'll. -- like bancock. ridesharing can be a strong contender to this as well. you have got to have this comparative service on the ground. so, these other markets, like india, i do not know enough about them to make those comments. as of now. emily: you have overseen a number of m&a deals, whether it was uber and didi, uber and grab, and alibaba, do you see more m&a in the ridesharing space globally and locally?

or do you see a bunch of -- multiple ride-hailing competitors continuing to square off in various markets around the world? be -- i think that we'll there will be more consolidation. i mentioned i think that here in china, the ridesharing services are taking off in a big way. that itself will be a strong .ontender a forced to contend with. i think there will be more consolidation. and i think the way to look at these services, it is not just the transportation service or the transportation network. there are local services and businesses, where user engagement can be high.

and there is a wide range offering, rather than just getting a car ride. emily: all right, jixun foo, on the phone with us from shanghai. thank you for joining us. coming up, one european robotics company is doubling down on the efforts in china. detailed hind abb's decision. -- details behind abb's decision. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: now to some tech news out of europe. swiss automation giant abb expects to double staff and production working in china over the next couple years. they already have the largest market share in china, so what is driving this expansion? joining us from london, caroline hyde. walk us through the expansion here and what is behind it. vast companys is a

already. 17,000 employees in the country. they want to double that to have 34,000 over the next couple years. and this is a company across many an industry group, oil, gas, mining. but notably they want to provide robotics at the moment because china cannot get enough of them. even of china has 30% of the world's supply currently of robots, it is not that much in comparison to the workforce. for every, what is in, 10,000 workers they currently have 100 robots. in other developed nations, such as germany and singapore and in south korea, they have three times that, 300 robots per 10,000 workers. they have a lot of catching up to do here. notably, the timing is right for abb because china will help subsidize the localities, the cities, to be able to buy these sorts of robots and get them into the industry. emily: so, how does this company

deal with the lax intellectual property standards we have been hearing about for a long time and that the u.s. has recently hit back at with these tariffs? caroline: exactly. you must have seen when you were out in china yourself, it is urgently what donald trump is fighting back at. he says this is the fight for intellectual property. this is something that the abb ceo did speak to when he was in china at the development forum. he said actually, we just have got to beat them at their own game -- a love that phrase he used. he said we have got to write the book faster than they can read it. that is why they are pouring money into ar -- money into r&d. they have put $1.5 billion into it per year worldwide. it is all about r&d. emily: i want you to give us an update on the latest with facebook. obviously many regulators in europe have been speaking out.

now we are hearing more from germany. what are we hearing from the region? caroline: it has come out fighting and i am not surprised. they do have issues about the data privacy. if you want to have your business in berlin, you have got to put services in germany. justiceearing from the minister. he is saying in particular that the handling of the private data facebook has been uncurable. and apparently, the policies were not enough. they need a much tighter supervision of companies like facebook in the future, he says. they can already slap on fines. now it looks like they will really fight back with the data privacy area. emily: thank you, caroline. we will see later in the show. coming up, more on the coverage

after the fallout with the facebook scandal. can the social network keep the advertisers on board? that is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

paul: uber has been accused of disabling the standard collision avoidence technology. auto-parts maker supplied the vehicle radar and camera and says the accident was not a failure of the technology. uber's own system failed to slow the volvo as the 49-year-old victim crossed the street. uber has been suspended from further testing in arizona. the former brazilian president againsts holding

corruption charges. this means he is barred from the presidential election. he said the charges against him are designed to keep him from regaining the presidency. jumpedeet average bonus $184,000, the highest since 2006. bonuses rose as profits from broken operations approach $25 billion, the most since 2010. global news 24 hours a day, powered by 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries around the world. i'm paul allen. this is bloomberg. i have a check on the markets and asian stocks are gaining ground, while the yen is on the retreat.

all might not be gloom and doom on the trade front as countries barter for deals. the shanghai composite is advancing for the first time in five sessions and we have earnings rising after delivering record profits. now in japan, the nikkei and topix are climbing. talks are ongoing for tariff e p emptions. south korea secured an exemption with an import quota. -- the korean won is jumping the most since january 26. plus, geopolitics could be at aay as kim jong un makes surprise visit to beijing. checking out on the bond switching up right here, i want to note jgb 10 year yields.

we have seen the highest yields in the commodities space. still, aluminum and copper. the copper could be at risk, whi le supplies looking at the market. ♪ emily: this is bloomberg technology and i am emily chang. back to our continuing coverage of the follow-up from facebook's data scandal. as we reported earlier, an analyst there is warning of a potential home to some ad campaigns. mark zuckerberg took out full-page ads in the u.s. and u.k. to apologize for facebook not doing enough to safeguard the user data, but will that be enough to keep advertisers happy? joining us to discuss that is e-mae, an analyst and rketer. you have analysts out there saying buy, some saying sell.

how do you expect this will hit the top and bottom line? debbie: you know, that's something to be seen. i will be really interested in seeing what the quarterly results will reveal in a few weeks. thinkr now, i advertisers are thinking of a couple of important issues. the first is, what our users doing? a lot of them are doing the #deletefacebook. or are they keeping their accounts and using facebook less? fewer hoursl leave of time spent on facebook and less time for my advertising. they are also i think concerned about any sort of regulatory impact on the data they have access to. with regards to targeting advertising. if there were any sort of regulation that would involve reducing the ability to target advertising, that will impact

the ability to use facebook going forward. think that is weighing on the minds of advertisers as well. btvly: i have a chart here g# 571, and this shows you the percentage of monthly active users, which is an interesting way to examine engagement. how many facebook users are going to the app every single day and we are seeing it can't plateau.g it how much of a concern is that? emily: facebook does want to see growth with daily active users and engagement. not just people absentmindedly scrolling through the feed, but actually interacting and talking to people, engaging with their friends and family. that is why you saw facebook a couple of months ago we do the algorithm to favor that content from friends and family because they really need people to spend more active time on facebook, not just logging in once a day

to look at what is there. so, talking about advertising in particular, there are a lot of questions as to how facebook will potentially evolve the way it uses data in order to target users and advertising. i have another chart here, which shows that as the prices of ads have grown, the growth has actually slowed. thinkrious what you advertisers are going to do here. will they wait this out? will they keep pouring money into facebook because it is still one of the best ways to reach a very specific user, or are they going to leave? debbie: those are conversations we are having right now with emarketer's subscriber base. preliminarily, facebook is still one of the largest platforms massd in order to reach a

audience of people. and you have got to remember that at the end of the day, a lot of major brand advertisers still want to reach a lot of people. so, that's one side of it. the targeting is another issue. certainly, the ability to finely and precisely target people on facebook is something advertisers love that facebook and once again, if there is any limitation of that going forward, that will give them some pause. but right now advertisers are looking for branding goals. they will continue to use facebook and will continue to want to spend time and dollars on there and watch what happens over the next couple of weeks or months with regards to the usage. ght, debbie aho williamson, it was great to have you on the show. i want to continue to look at what this means for facebook. we are now joined live from

new york. i am curious, just to speaking with debbie earlier about the power facebook still has and the fact that prices like these, -- and the fact that crises like these facebook has weathered before. how much of an impact will this actually have on facebook? from a reputational and business perspective? back andstepping looking at the big picture, facebook is an integral part of marketer campaigns today. there are advertisers looking for facebook to help drive the sales. if you think about it, advertisers look exactly that branding and there are advertisers that use google and facebook for what you would call performance, to drive specific sales. and apart from google and facebook, those are two of the -- theportant ways

bigger issue -- emily: i want to as from a reputational perspective. users might say, well users opt into this, but even when they do, or check a box, they do not know how the data is being used and facebook does not know how that is. will this fundamentally undermine trust with facebook and will this impact engagement? michael: yes, but there is a lot facebook can do to reestablish that trust. first of all, it is less about privacy and more about control. facebook needs to be explicit in allowing people to have control. second of all, facebook needs to , whatar to the users information they have on them

and how that information is being used. the last couple of days, there has been news that facebook was using data from conversations on what has happened with facebook messenger, as well as calls for advertising targeting. facebook means to make it clear to users how they are using their data and if users feel they can have control, they are not going to delete facebook. and with respect to the story you just mentioned about scraping call data, facebook responded by saying, this is something users opt in notbut many users do understand what they are opting into. what do you make of the apology tour? it is hard to believe that facebook executives do not understand what was happening here. michael: the apology tour is much more taking ads in the wall street journal and new york

times -- that is more focused on advertisers. facebook has this amazing platform. they are not running the same campaign for their own users. so, what facebook really needs to do is, it needs to make it clear and provide controls so that users know and really understand how they can limit the amount of data that they give facebook and that they give to facebook advertisers. today, if you are a facebook user, it is very hard to figure out what you are sharing and what you are not sharing. facebook really needs to make that a lot easier. emily: what other platforms do you think could benefit from this? will snapchat see a bump, twitte r -- will instagram, though it is part of facebook -- many do not understand it is part of facebook, will instagram see a bump? michael: instagram is seeing a lot of growth, so is snap. but facebook's real competitor is google.

while google has a lot of information on people, a lot of that is not specific to individuals. so, this is a moment where google of course will exploit their privacy and their own ability to give consumers less -- to give away less of consumer's information to be able to focus on advertisers and is safe to consumers they have a better proposition. another company likely to benefit in the long run here is apple. apple has focused on privacy. they do not collect user information and they want to build their own advertising business. that will be an important proposition, not just for advertisers, but of their customers. emily: indeed they have. activate,lf, ceo of great to have you on the show. michael: thank you, emily. emily: the a.i. that powers your phones is great at making an emoji, but did you know it could be hiding an inherent

bias? that is next and this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: you are looking at a special pizza delivery via drone brought to us for the season five premier of silicon valley. tune in over the next couple weeks for a few fun surprises and a cameo or two -- just needed about 15 seconds the microwave. digital intelligence is supposed to make our lives easier. but is that technology really colorblind, really gender blind?

a study by researchers at m.i.t. shows the gender of darker' skinned women was incorrectly identified 35% of the time. a post-doctorate researcher at microsoft, who is studying bias in a.i. systems. >> i do not know if can unbias it completely, but we can try to mitigate the bias and the effect of the bias. the first thing we need to do, and what i am working on right now is giving people guidelines as to how and where a particular dataset can be used. for example, some of the most recent research shows that facebook recognition software is far less accurate for women and specifically women of color than for white men. that is essentially sexist and racist. can you explain?

timnit: so, we looked at commercial gender classification systems. we looked at a picture of a face and they tell you whether the picture in it is of a man or woman, mail or female, binary classification. they do not handle any other type of identity. even in this case, when we look at the accuracies and we broke them down by the intersect the race and gender -- i don't even want to say race because race is not a very well-defined thing. we looked at skin type. we looked at the skin tone, which is a dermatologist approved way of looking at the skin type. as the skintight gets darker and darker and for darker skinned women, this gender classification system has worse and worse error rates and it approaches random chance. in answer to your earlier system, one of the ways to mitigate this is to try to iningr more diverse trai

sets, and testing algorithms by different populations, instead of having one single number that says my algorithm has a particular accuracy. it might sound nice, 98%, but when you break it down by subpopulations you might see it works better for some populations, rather than others. emily: is this something that apple for example, has a problem with. timnit: i have not done a systematic study of apple's face i.d. i do know there was a highly publicized article of this chinese woman who says the face i.d. did not work well on her. so, i'm pretty sure this is a problem that happens across the board and most industries across -- not even just face recognition but other algorithm types as well. facialso, face i.d., recognition is one example. what the consequences of this on the broader scale? if we do not start rewriting these algorithms and get new data to fix it. timnit: one thing people do not

understand is that a.i. components are being used everywhere by everyone. that is an exaggeration, but they have been in many different faces if you look at recognition algorithms, they are being used to identify what people think are criminals, they are being used for surveillance and whether or not face recognition should be used for surveillance is one debate that people should have. -- should have anyway. but were it to be used for surveillance, we have to make people understand that these face recognition algorithms are not accurate to be used for surveillance. emily: you say women are at a bigger risk of losing jobs because of this. how so? timnit: i am not sure if women are unilaterally at a bigger risk at losing jobs because of ai. but i do think anybody who is

marginalized at this moment in our society is at a higher risk of losing jobs as of ai. and this is because many of the lower paying jobs that are more omatable are being done by people with a lower income, people who have been historic a marginalized. anyone that our society has marginalized is more likely to lose jobs. emily: i wonder if this could be solved by getting more women and people of color into ai and machine learning and how much of this we cannot solve because it has already been done. timnit: i think that a lot of issues of bias could be mitigated by not only having more people who are from historically marginalized ai, but alson interacting with these people. it is not a coincidence that the two authors of the paper you were just describing agenda for classification systems, showing

how biased they are, that they are black women. if you are not interfacing with people who are negatively affected by bias in ai, you are less likely to think this problem is a big problem. emily: do you think companies like microsoft and google and facebook are doing enough to build diverse teams and trty to make sure the bias does not get rewritten over and over again? timnit: no, i do not think companies are doing enough to build ever seems and i would say this unilaterally across tech companies. there is a lot more talking about diversity van action. sure, there is some action going on, but it is not a priority. i think when it comes down to it, people in leadership positions have to make it a priority. a need to spend as much time trying to fix this problem, as they do trying to map out profit. and i do not think that people in leadership positions are spending enough time thinking about this.

there.timnit gebru coming up, stocks staged a comback on monday. is the pressur eon the markets behind us? this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: back to our top story, the u.s. bouncing back in a big way on the markets. the dow, s&p and nasdaq all surging above 2% in monday trading after signs emerged over the weekend that the u.s. could seek deals with china to avert a trade war. to recap the positive day in wall street, i want to bring back caroline hyde. the big question is, is the worst behind us? caroline: well, what a phenomenal pop we saw in the green in the u.s. it will be interesting to see how the futures market opens in europe and if asia and europe carry on these games because they close today in the red.

will they follow where the u.s. has been after the worst week i n more than two years. the s&psurged back in 500 and tech. this will contribute a lot. why? because this lovely chart -- it shows you the two key sectors that did well today, tech in financials. financials in the yellow since the financial crisis have not been as important to the s&p 500 aztec as. tech makes up 25 of the s&p 500 market value. there, when you have the best since augustctotocks 2015, that really does help it pop. dig into the rest of the function on the bloomberg. if you go to the s&p 500 and type in imap, you get this little chart. and you will see that in the

imap -- what do we have, a 4% uptick. financials are up 3.2%. then type in maybe the likes of an mrr in the i.t. sector and this is where we get a breakdown of the performance. the biggest the jupiter to the s&p 500, adobe and intel all surging above 6%. only three in the red. fefacebook is a bit of a laggar. emily: facebook will be the one to watch, ending the day slightly up but still down over the last week. helen hyde in london, thank you for that recap. and that does it for this edition of bloomberg technology. a reminder, we are live streaming on twitter at technology weekdays 5:00 p.m. in new york and 2:00 p.m. in san francisco. that is it for now. this i bloombergs. ♪

retail.

under pressure like never before. and it's connected technology that's moving companies forward fast. e-commerce. real time inventory. virtual changing rooms. that's why retailers rely on comcast business to deliver consistent network speed across multiple locations. every corporate office, warehouse and store near or far covered. leaving every competitor, threat and challenge outmaneuvered. comcast business outmaneuver.

yousef: stocks surged as trade continues. asian markets are flying this morning followed along for the strongest day for u.s. equities. ausef: theresa may hails global response against moscow for the poisoning of a former spy in britain. manus: a ronan: exclusive. ipo anddefends the skepticism grows. yousef: the cleveland fed chair gives her explanation of what