emily: i'm emily chang in washington and this is "bloomberg technology." in the next hour, mark zuckerberg faces the wrath of european parliament and leaves a lot of questions unanswered, and a lot of lawmakers frustrated. we will bring you the highlights. plus, good the cryptocurrency markets have a friend in washington? a candidate joins us to find out why he thinks a digital cryptocurrency expert should be in the capitol. and in the world of e-sports,

competitive play at fortnite are expected to gain more popularity this year. we will ask the ceo how it works in this massive market. but first, to our top story. mark zuckerberg testifying before the european parliament. he faced tough questions about data privacy, advertising, and whether facebook is a monopoly that needs to be broken up. zuckerberg meantime had one specific message to convey, and that is that he is sorry. >> it's also become clear over the last couple of years that we haven't done enough to prevent these tools from being used for harm as well. and that goes for fake news, foreign interference in elections, and developers misusing people's information. we didn't take a broadening of view of our responsibility, and that was a mistake, and i'm sorry for it. emily: to talk that the testimony we're joined by sarah frier in san francisco and

scott, partner of fox rothschild, chairman of the firm's privacy and data security practice group, and called a trailblazer in cybersecurity law by the national journal. give us the roundup, the hearing not ending on a high note with lawmakers saying we asked you a lot of questions that you just didn't answer. >> part of that was just due to the nature of the way the hearing was designed. we got about an hour questions from the european lawmakers before zuckerberg even had a chance to respond, and then when he did respond, he spoke for about 26 minutes, and he was able to just go in in order that he preferred, based on his notes. you ask a lot of questions about content, about this and that, and kind of respond with the stuff that facebook has been saying recently, and maybe not so much digging into the most interesting questions, the ones about facebook's increasing power in the world, and the ones

about how exactly they will protect people from new issues with regard to data privacy that have come up as a result of our examinations of facebook over the last few months. emily: there were a couple of questions that he pivoted on and dodged when it came to tracking and security and so-called shadow profiles. did you hone in on anything in particular that you felt was questionable? scott: look, i think that under the circumstances, and given the atmosphere that was highly charged and highly combative -- and i'm no defender of facebook necessarily -- i think zuckerberg did well. i think he basically handled himself pretty well and held his own, but you are right, there were some direct questions, particularly directed to the issue of whether or not facebook is a monopoly that needs to be broken up that he did not answer, understandably so, and he did not directly answer the

question around shadow profiles and what information is kept on non-facebook user for security purposes. those are questions i think he purposely pivoted on and that he prefers to either not follow up on, or as he promised he would follow up on in the days to come. but i think, again, this was the format he chose, he did not necessarily want to be cross-examined in the way that he was on capitol hill, and therefore he gave individuals an opportunity to speechify so that he could hit the high points from his standpoint. emily: and what is our understanding of how do shadow profiles actually do work on facebook? scott, do you have more information than zuckerberg gave us? scott: the only thing i can tell you is that what concerns people on capitol hill and what concerns legislators in the european union is that facebook supposedly, or apparently, does

create profiles on non-facebook users who have internet activity. and they claim to keep that information for security purposes separate and apart from people's profiles. now, if you understand what i said, you are better than i am, because i cannot figure out exactly what it means when it says that, but i think it is troubling that -- look, if you use facebook as one of the parliamentarians said, you have some obligation to police yourself and police what you are doing online. but if you are a non-facebook user, the fact that they are creating a profile about you or creating and holding information about your internet activity, i think that is troubling to a lot of people, not just consumers in the european union, but consumers everywhere. the other question that he did not answer which i think is going to get some continued attention is the fact that facebook deliberately moved information belonging to non-european union union residents out of the european

union recently and back to the united states. i think the reason for that is pretty obvious, he did not directly answer that question. emily: we are talking a few days ahead of gdp are going into effect here. sarah, is there anything you want to fact check there? sara: facebook did actually answer in a very low profile blog post after congressional testimony what exactly they do do with the information they get on people who do not have facebook accounts, and let me tell you, it's not about security. security is maybe the seventh reason, but first and foremost, they are tracking these people because they have to in order to -- if you're going to figure out what facebook users are doing, you basically have to scan everyone who goes to those sites, and in the nonusers, they said what they do with that information in addition to checking identity and things like that, they make sure that those people, if they don't have

facebook accounts, get to be targeted with advertising that they should join facebook. so there are a lot of reasons why helps facebook to track nonusers, and i should also say, the same problem applies to issues like facial recognition. it's very hard for facebook to implement facial recognition only with the people who ought into it. people who don't opt in still get scanned, but maybe the information does it used in the same way as the people who do opt in. so very interesting debates to come here in the european union. emily: something of that has come to the forefront is fake accounts on facebook. last quarter, facebook removed hundreds of millions of fake accounts and a quarter before. so this is an ongoing problem. he did address how they are using ai to combat the problem in the future. take a listen. >> we are also using new technology including ai to

remove fake accounts that are responsible for much of the false news, misinformation and bad ads that people can see on facebook. emily: scott, how concerning is this fake accounts issue, given the scale and the fact that it seems like facebook has dealt with this quarter after quarter. scott: i think it is an ongoing issue for facebook. it's not clear if they're winning the war on fake accounts or not. one of the people participating in today's hearing in fact said that the number or the percentage of overall fake accounts has actually grown. someone cited 2%-3% of all facebook accounts, and now it has grown to 3%-4% of all facebook accounts. the reason is particularly troublesome, at least in part, it's the fake facebook accounts that are responsible for, among other things, interference in national elections. and zuckerberg himself said they were too slow to react to the

russian issue in 2016. they claim to be doing a better job. many people in europe are concerned, given the number of elections scheduled in the next year or so that fake accounts that seem to interfere and manipulate or otherwise improperly influence elections will continue to be an issue. emily: what kind of action could facebook actually face in the e.u. given gdpr is already going into effect, and the e.u. has taken a stronger line on google, for example, the massive fine over the shopping service and a big tax penalty for apple and a fine for facebook about how it handled whatsapp. what are we really look at? sarah: the antitrust issues are really interesting, whether they should be ever to own instagram and whatsapp. gdpr is one thing.

whether that law is strictly enforced for facebook is another thing. zuckerberg needs to show that he is making a good-faith effort to really keep the best interest of european users at heart, but if there is anything in facebook's actions that really illustrates otherwise, and they can take stronger action than maybe the company is expecting, for example the stc policy in the united states was in effect for years, but it was never really enforced. in many cases is not just the law that matters, but how strictly it is implemented. emily: go on, scott, 30 seconds. scott: i think sarah is absolutely right. at this point, if i was zuckerberg, i would be more

concerned about antitrust action taken by european regulators than i would necessarily be about whether or not he is compliant with gdpr. that is a potential weakness that may well be exploited in the coming months. emily: scott, thank you so much, and are very on sarah frier. intel has disclosed it found another way to attack computers related to the chip security flaws announced earlier this year. the company said there's no evidence of it having been used to hack computers and a fix is already in place. coming up, the company behind the hottest videogame is making a big push toward e-sports. details on epic games $100 million investments. that's next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: e-sports continuing to gain traction around the world, and one company wants in on the action. epic games has announced $100 million for prize pool money in the first year of competitive play. not much detail has come out on what the tournament's might look like, but if last month, in vegas is a preview of what's to come, this could be a serious game changer. the event in april was held at the newly opened e-sports arena at the luxor resort in las vegas. it allows gamers to meet up and compete in the hottest new video

tournament's in what could become a $1.5 billion industry by 2020. joining us with more is judd hannigan. i feel we have to start with fortnite. what is it about this particular game that you think is captured the fascination of a generation or two of gamers? judd: 49 has taken the world by storm. it has truly grabbed gamers everywhere and it's these to the -- it speaks to the volume and excitement around the battle royale genre of gaming, which has been around for a while but has picked up steam. one research firm supported 40 million players worldwide and $23 million of revenue in the month of march alone for epic games and this phenomenal growth in fortnite. emily: is it every person for themselves, is it teams? will it be happening in your arenas?

judd: absolutely. the beauty of this genre are the different formats. the interesting thing is that there are about 100 players that dropped into a map and you are scrambling for weapons, and it's the last man standing type of game. there's really no limit to the creativity that can happen inside these games. what is coming from epic and other creative tournament organizers like ourselves will be truly exciting for the industry as a whole. emily: talk about how you see these fitting into your arenas and your realm. judd: we have six arenas around the world in north america, europe, and china. our flagship open up in march in

las vegas. one of the things we really looked at was the rise of fortnite and how truly powerful and popular this game was, and had we bring that excitement into a building? we partnered up with the most popular influencer and streamer in that game and brought him in. where he is typically streaming from his home to millions of viewers every day, we brought him into las vegas, headlining on the las vegas strip, and basically created an environment where players in the arena could play with him. really an enhanced experience overall. emily: talk about how -- do you think it could help or hurt e-sports, given the traditional first-person shooter audience? judd: e-sports really covers a wide variety of games. there's multiplayer online arenas, first-person shooters at can be team-based. there's a lot of different genres out there today.

the inclusiveness to it, the ability to play in different formats within the same framework of the game is exciting. you can see that by the interest in people watching, tuning in, but also the amount of players is just phenomenal. emily: when talking about it games, there's always the question, is it a flash in the pan, or is it going to be a franchise that will generate hundreds of millions of dollars year after year. is it too early to say that fortnite is going to be a lasting hit? i think about pokémon go, which really was a moment and not a

movement. judd: i think you are right, it is early. one of the things that is amazing about this industry is the games keep changing. new games keep coming, and while not many people had heard about fortnite six or seven months ago, it is the hottest game today. this industry has the power for a newcomer to come along and for more growth and more users and more players. that is one of the exciting things about it. last year alone in 2017, it was $112 million in the industry. we've just double that in one game. it is exciting and it certainly makes you feel like fortnite is here to stay, but the industry will keep coming out with more and more creative games. emily: there are different leagues. what are the lessons you are learning in terms of what works and what doesn't work when it

comes to these big pro e-sports leagues? judd: one of the things about us as a company is we are game agnostic. try to work with everybody. our facilities are infrastructure that the industry as a whole can utilize. we work at creating leaks and events and try to work with a wide variety of publishers. each game has its own nuances. what works and what doesn't. the industry is so nascent, it is figuring it out. we will see as it evolves over time. the great thing is the power in the numbers and interest globally. this year it's projected to be a global audience of 380 million people worldwide. with that kind of power comes a lot of opportunity to grow and explore. the fact that it's truly global allows a great path for that. emily: i want to ask you about amazon and twitch. the company made a big splash buying twitch for a million dollars. we haven't talked as much about it since. what has been amazon's influence

on twitch, and where do you see them taking it and fitting it into the overall amazon empire? judd: if we just talked about twitch for one second, this industry really evolved with the idea of a livestream platform and twitch was the first mover in that regard. that's where the majority of this audience, certainly in the western hemisphere, is tuning in. amazon's acquisition was extremely brilliant when it comes to harnessing the power of this demographic that is tuning into this. nothing reaches the 18-35-year-old demographic, it's like e-sports and gaming. what is going on is much more than just competitive videogame in, it is entertaining. it is folks like ninja that are broadcasting themselves to millions of people just playing this game, and can appreciate what he's doing. amazon's ability to connect that with all their other offerings is allowed for them to be able to cross market a lot of their

other services. i think that's the brilliant power of what they've done by acquiring this audience. we now have the most viewers on twitch for a single stream just on that event alone, 680000 and 2.4 million over the broadcast. emily: judd hannigan, thank you so much for joining us. we will keep watching and playing. coming up, we had to the director of the u.s. national counterintelligence and security center discusses how cyber threats could disrupt the smartphone market's global supply chain. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: president trump said his administration is reconsidering u.s. penalties that have shut down chinese telecom company zte.

the u.s. may now fine a company more than a billion dollars. president trump on tuesday said the changing u.s. stand on zte is due to his personal relationship with china's leader. president trump: as a favor to the president, i'm absolutely taking a look at it. a lot of these stories on trade were incorrectly written, and i'm not saying that's the reporters' fault, i'm not talking about the trade deal. i do like to talk about deals until they are done. emily: the president make those comments while meeting with south korea's president as they discuss the status of talks with north korea, which may not happen now, according to trump. our senior executive editor caught up with the director of the u.s. national securities director at the sooner than you think conference in paris. they talked about what threats chinese telecom companies posed to the united states. >> we've been pretty clear about the threat from china telecom companies and what they posed, for cellular communications in the u.s. and worldwide. >> let's take a step back and

look at the global supply chain. companies in the u.s. and china and around the world, robotics and hardware and software are in mesh. what kind of security threat does it pose that we use products where components or software are made in manufacturing facilities located in some of our adversaries like china? >> it's a great question. i'm coming from a position that these threats are significant. if you look at defense of the nation or a company or industry, you start with vulnerabilities and then threats. when you have that office of understanding your company or your business, and what makes your company vulnerable. with this perspective on supply chain, you have to look at the cyber capabilities and what you make and how you protected. the cybersecurity part of that is critical on supply chain. and if you're procuring

something, who is making that server, and where does it originate from? emily: that was director of the u.s. national counterintelligence and security center. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: this is "bloomberg technology." i'm emily chang. as the pentagon struggles to recruit a more tech-savvy workforce, it is a thing that confuses many old-timers and not old-timers. what to make of people who invest in or trade in bitcoin. the question is if it is an indicator of risky personal behavior that should flag extra scrutiny at security clearances or is it just another investment choice? joining us is dan flatley who covers the pentagon. we are talking about the pentagon trying to hire a more tech savvy workforce. why should they care about someone dabbling in bitcoin?

dan: secretary jim mattis said building a tech-savvy force is a priority for the defense department. in order to do this, these workers have to have a high level of security clearance. in order to obtain that, the pentagon goes through extensive background checks. they look at financial holdings. a few months ago, there was some indication that the department of defense, defense security service was considering or would consider bitcoin a foreign currency which would then have to be reported on a lengthy sheet, or series of forms that anyone applying for security clearance would fill out. so, that got some people nervous because obviously bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have become popular, particularly

among the kind of workers the defense department is looking to recruit. there were several questions. the defense security service came out with an official statement saying there is no official statement. they said we are looking at this and let everyone know what we decide. emily: what would it mean for the cryptocurrency market if the pentagon decided holding bitcoin is a security risk? dan: it's sort of speaks to the issue that everyone in the government is trying to figure out how to regulate cryptocurrencies or how they should be regulated. the fcc looks at them a particular way, the cfpc thinks of them in a particular way. the pentagon may think of them in a particular way. the pentagon is a large government agency and it could throw some cold water on the notion that these are harmless investments. if the pentagon were to take a particular stance on them one way or another.

emily: we are actually going to be talking to a candidate that is very supportive of cryptocurrencies, but how are other lawmakers and candidates, as we are going to the midterms now, approaching cryptocurrency in general? dan: i think that a lot of them are not quite sure what to make of them, like the rest of the government. brian forde, who will be on the program later, is supportive of them. i think a lot of cryptocurrency enthusiasts are looking for someone in washington who could perhaps figure out a way to get some sort of blanket treatment for these. part of the issue is, with the pentagon and how it looks at it is whether or not cryptocurrencies will be considered foreign currency. that is a determination made by the treasury department. all of these things overlap each other. and how this will all sort out remains to be seen, but i think

it is certainly something that people are using not only to get support, but also to attack opponents if it comes up. emily: dan flatley, bloomberg news, who covers the pentagon for us. thank you so much for sharing that update. speaking of politics and bitcoin, something our next guest is familiar with. in his current run as democratic candidate for congress in california's 45th district, brian forde is being described as the crypto candidate. not just because he takes campaigns and cryptocurrency, but has the support of bitcoin investors and enthusiasts like the winklevoss twins. all of whom have donated the federal maximum to his campaign. he was a senior tech advisor for the obama administration and the director of the digital currency initiative. brian forde joins us now.

thank you so much for stopping by. obviously, it is nice to have the cash, but when it comes to actual policy on cryptocurrency, what are your proposals? brian: i think, in regards to the attacks on my campaign excepting crypto, i think bill bradley said it best, attacking a federal democrat for accepting bitcoin is like attacking a fellow democrat for using the internet back in 1996. what my opponent demonstrates is he is not prepared to lead in the 21st century and i am. less than 4% of congress have a technical background like me. more than 40% of them are lawyers. the average age of democratic leadership is 72 years old. i'm 38. what we saw in the mark zuckerberg congressional hearing, to the amazement of everyone in america, is that our legislators have the skill sets

for the 20th century, yet tackling 21st-century problems. what we have seen in the face of these attacks is that the rest of america sees this and we have actually raised more than $130,000 in the wake of these baseless attacks at crypto.forde.com, and people are continuing to support because they want more scientists and technologists who believe in evidence-based policymaking, not emotional thinking which you have right now in congress. when i do get there, what we have to look at -- this is not just for cryptocurrency, this is for all emerging technologies. it turns out with emerging technologies, they are not generally illegal, legal, they are just new. i experienced this myself as an entrepreneur. i served in the peace corps in nicaragua and i stayed and built one of the largest companies in the country to help the poor. we brought in a new technology called voice over ip. that technology was not illegal or legal, it was new. it was helping hundreds of thousands of nicaraguans.

that story is similar to all the folks were building a new companies with autonomous vehicles, cryptocurrency, etc. emily: to be fair, you are being accused of just accepting bitcoin. the problem your opponents are talking about is what bitcoin can potentially be associated with. some of your opponents saying donors are bitcoin speculators will oppose cracking down on drug dealers and human trafficking. brian: what dan did, when he talked to their campaign was they said they actually have no proof that that is true. it is basically attacks using fear monitoring and -- mongering instead of policymaking and that is a problem with congress, washington, d.c. we need to send more scientists

to congress to think rationally, not emotionally. what we have to think about is we need regulatory sandboxes -- emily: it is not just tech -- lawmakers who don't understand it potentially or don't like it. you have bill gates saying he would short bitcoin if he could. warren buffett saying it is rat poison squared. brian: bill gates also missed the smartphone, the internet and other technologies. while he hit it right on microsoft, he is missing the point and has a few other big misses in his history. emily: it is clear some of our lawmakers do not understand technology, case in point, mark zuckerberg's testimony. where some of the senators and representatives did not even know how facebook makes its money. if you were asking mark zuckerberg questions today as part of the european parliament or elsewhere, what would you ask him? brian: i think there are a couple of things. number one, what was mark zuckerberg's personal goal this year? his goal this year was to better understand cryptocurrencies and

the power of decentralization. i think what is incredibly critical in what i've would have asked him is what steps are you going to take to be able to enable blockchain-based personal data so that the user can have more control over their data? i know this is possible because we built out a system that my research lab to do that for medical records so that patients would have better access and better control over their personal information as it gets connected to doctors and it is incredibly humble to consumers. i would also ask him -- every five minutes, he was talking about artificial intelligence this, artificial intelligence that. the question is not whether you can use artificial intelligence, the question we are seeking is does it have systematic biases built into this? this is the 21st century version of our civil rights. that is why the aclu has stood

up a unit on artificial intelligence. we have to ensure that companies that are using it that there is enough transparency in the artificial intelligence like darpa is doing to ensure that we as citizens have a right to know how decisions are being made about us or potentially against us, because we have seen too many examples of artificial intelligence systematically discriminating against people of color, for example. emily: so, in -- brian: here's the other thing. emily: hang on. in parliament today, zuckerberg was asked about regulations in particular and how or if facebook should be regulated. take a listen to what he had to say. mark: i think the internet is becoming increasingly important in people's lives. some sort of regulation is important and inevitable. the important thing is to get this right and to make sure we have regulatory frameworks that help protect people, that are flexible so they allow for innovation, that don't inadvertently prevent new

technologies like ai from being able to be developed. emily: cryptocurrency aside, should facebook be better regulated, and if so, what regulation would you propose? brian: so, i would look at how we can make sure -- i think mark is right. some of these technologies do need to be regulated, but need to be regulated in such a way they have regulatory sandboxes, so that we are ensuring we are protecting consumer safety and consumer rights, while at the same time given the possibility to develop business models that have yet to be unearthed. i will give you an example because we need to look back in history rather than look forward with technology and see what worked previously. i would argue that today most people don't face any problems with spam.

it is mostly a nonissue. if you look at it, there was a two-pronged strategy to tackle that. one was the spam act that put out a set of rules and regulations for companies in the united states to abide by. we knew those rules would not be able to tackle the nigerian prince scam. what tech companies that across america is they came up with better spam filters. that helped block out that part of spam that does not relate to what law could cover. what you always need is a two track process -- regulations that will protect consumer safety and consumer rights without preventing -- without blocking innovation. while at the same time, allowing for technology to have innovation to help achieve and tackle some of these are problems as well. and then you get to a place where ultimately we are all trying to achieve as policymakers and technologists are trying to achieve which is to make the world a little better for everyone. emily: brian forde, we will be watching on the trail. thank you so much for joining us. another story we have in following along the same lines.

amazon being criticized by civil rights groups over its facial recognition software. the aclu and a coalition of other civil rights groups have demanded amazon stop letting law-enforcement use its program called recognition that uses ai to quickly identify people. according to the aclu, law-enforcement agencies in florida and oregon are using the service for surveillance. amazon said various agencies have used recognition to find abducted people without providing specific examples. coming up, a legend in the ad agency world speaks to bloomberg. what advice he has for mark zuckerberg. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: paris is rolling out the red carpet for tech and numerous events are underway including bloomberg's sooner than you think conference and a high-profile meeting with the french president and dozens of tech leaders. maurice levy joined bloomberg television from paris and talked about what he hoped to accomplish. maurice: the tech world is now meeting in paris. we start tomorrow with a very important meeting with president macron about tech for good. how technology can help people to have a better life. and from thursday through saturday, we will have the tech world meeting in paris. we are expecting to get -- 6000 startups, more than 2000

investors. it is something which will be extremely important and it shows that france is committed to be ready for technology, for startups, entrepreneurship. this is something that is rather new, fresh. only three years. we expect all the planet to have their eyes looking at paris. caroline: what policies has president macron brought on to make it a better place for startup companies? maurice: i think the first thing he did was piece of mind. change the opinion that even the french can have about entrepreneurship and being successful. in france, it was not so good to be successful. success was not celebrated to say the least. sometimes people were blamed because they were successful and making it west.

today, president macron and the government as a whole are encouraging the young people to start up their own business and encouraging the venture capitalists to invest in france and to support startups. caroline: president macron will meet with some 40 technology leaders, including mark zuckerberg. he wants to remind them of the responsibility. is technology taking its responsibility seriously enough for the moment? what changes need to be made? maurice: the reason why he is organizing the meeting tomorrow with roughly 70 ceos, some very important names you have already mentioned, and important names

in france -- the main reason is to see what the future would be and how technology, which is creating some fears. you have a lot of people fearing about what technology can do to their job. the fact they may not be able to succeed in the future or even to continue just to work. there is three sessions which will be organized, three breakout sessions. one about education, what should be the education of the future. the second regarding the future of work. how we should be organizing work and the continued use of training of the people. they are never left aside. last, but not least, about

equality, gender and diversity. it is extremely important. caroline: we are seeing also as we are speaking in a couple of hours, mark zuckerberg in front of european parliament to describe why the data of millions of europeans was put into the hands of cambridge analytica. there was a concern not just about ai, but about privacy of our data. you will be speaking to mark zuckerberg on stage on thursday. what will you ask him about his responsibility for the data of those? maurice: we will be covering a lot of aspects, including what happened. i will very candidly open the floor with a few questions regarding what happened. i cannot tell you what will be the answer yet, but clearly, it

is a conversation which we not only cover what happened with cambridge analytica, but what he is doing for the future. i believe, in fact, in his operation, there has probably been some weaknesses technically. facebook is a little bit of a victim rather than complicit in the operation. from what i do know, cambridge analytica has abused the confidence of facebook and has taken assets and information that they should not have taken. something which is extremely important that we are on the eve of gdpr, which is a new european regulation regarding data protection, data privacy, and the fact you cannot use data without getting the approval of

the users and owner of the information. this is probably a new era regarding data and user data in the future. emily: that was maurice leavy, chair of publicis groupe. we will bring you more coverage from the sooner than you think conference in paris. coming up, sony's music empire is about to get a lot bigger, a lot bigger. how its latest deal will let artists like beyoncé bring more into the fold. that is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: sony is set to solidify its position as the largest music publisher in the world when it buys emi music for about $2 billion. this will come in the form of a 60% equity stake. the ceo will set sony up for years to come. >> this move is a way to intensify our content and ip business. if sony and emi combine, own the copyrights of 4.4 million songs, sony becomes one of the largest music publishers in the world. we expect steady income from music publishing and it will be a key growth area in the long-term. emily: uber is launching its first taxi hailing pilot program in japan. starting this summer, uber will essentially operate as a taxi dispatcher, connecting local drivers and passengers in a remote island home to 100,000 people.

japanese law prohibits uber from operating its own fleet of drivers. you must have a professional license. uber will be facing competition. didi and sony are working on rival taxi hailing services in japan. samsung is building a new technology research center in cambridge, england. it may hire as many as 150 ai experts, bringing the total number of employees at samsung to 400. u.k. prime minister theresa may called it a vote of confidence as a world leader in ai. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." we are in washington tomorrow talking to congressman greg walden, chair of the house energy and commerce committee, and eu ambassador david o'sullivan. that is all for now. this is bloomberg. ♪ mom, dad, can we talk?

sure. what's up, son? i can't be your it guy anymore. what? you guys have xfinity. you can do this. what's a good wifi password, mom? you still have to visit us. i will. no. make that the password: "you_stillóhave_toóvisit_us." that's a good one. seems a bit long, but okay... set a memorable wifi password with xfinity my account. one more way comcast is working to fit into your life, not the other way around.

>> the following is a paid program. the opinions and views expressed do not reflect bloomberg lp, its affiliates, or employees. >> right now it is all new, a paid presentation for meaningful beauty by cindy crawford. >> with special appearances from some of your tv favorites sharing their skin saving secrets. >> plus, a stunning before and after story from today's special guest. >> at age 52, the star of "full house," lori loughlin's skin looks younger thanks to friend and supermodel cindy crawford. lore