>> i'm emily chang in san francisco. this is bloomberg technology. coming up, the u.s. supreme court frees state and local collect billions in taxes from online retailers. -- a majoror seafood shake-up. removed.anich is remove we're going to discuss who is in the running to permanently take over intel. services are

trying to outdo each other. likean traditional media disney keep up? first, to our top story. the u.s.mark ruling, supreme court just ruled states and local governments can start collecting billions in sales tax from online retailers. the decision will impact online that don't currently collect tax from their customers, if they don't have a state.l presence in that it overturns a 1992 ruling that had made much of the internet a tax-free zone. online retailers, as a whole, on this news. wayfair, new stock, all parties, saying it would hurt small by hitting them with heavy costs to comply with rules for thousands of products and jurisdictions.x joining us now from minneapolis, have bloomberg intelligence analysts. you, gina.tart with amazon, ebay, also in the mix. theare the winners, who are

losers? >> well, the winners are probably brick and mortar for the next year. go back and look at what's happened from amazon, rewind -- rewind 10 years ago. only about 10% of the items they collected taxes on. that's about 70%. during that time, they've accelerated their growth from to mid-20%. the reason why it's a win, at least near term for traditional is that therear, is going to be a period, probably a year period, where think will maybe stop and twice, because they don't get that 5% discount on some items. think that over time, people will just forget about that and kind of move on and buy what they want, where they want it, online. near-term win for traditional brick and mortar, a small win. cohn of -- with jay a big position in wayfair. he told us this isn't that because most internet retailers are already collecting taxes on the majority of their sales and the legislation is

going to be applied uniformly on the web, so amazon won't be wayfair, vicesus versa. consumer behavior won't change. andrew, would you agree? >> i'm not so sure about that. i actually think that it's going difference for companies like wayfair and new they'reause they -- not, you know, used to collecting these taxes. we're talking about 12,000 different tax jurisdictions that they're going to have to comply with. doing that, sody they have an advantage over companies like wayfair. certainly brick and mortar companies will benefit. but i actually think amazon benefits here as well. >> let's talk about what this will mean for consumers. i mean, consumers love low prices, but in this day and -- in this day and age, they really love convenience. >> you're exactly right. as we surveyed this over the years, i was surprised -- i

originally found this out, but i'm not as surprised today. price is the third reason people shot online. usually it's selection and then the delivery. two, you could wrap them up as more broadly convenient. is the third most important piece. so i think that's the reason why, after a year, people kind of move on and come back to these online, despite higher taxes. but, yeah, to put this kind of quickly into perspective, 350 million unique items on amazon in the u.s. it's obviously difficult to drive to a store and get that selection. and that is paramount in consumers' decisions. statement, today's ruling is limited to large online retailers and confirms are small businesses clearly viewed differently by the court. now is the time for congress to with a clear tax rules strong small business exemption. andrew, talk to us about what doesn't address

and what will be left up to congress. >> congress has a lot of things they need to address. of the things is back taxes, going back to sales taxes that collected.n south dakota not one of those. thatnot part of their law was at issue. also a rule that congress has proposed a couple of different haven't been approved, you know -- i think it's $1 million was the last bill. isth dakota's rule, i think, much lower. the de minimis rule is something 10,000. for small businesses, this rule says that states can tax without any sort of minimum, know. you sell one thing in one state, in north dakota, for example, and you're taxed. >> how are we expecting congress to respond?

>> before i answer that, emily, i want to mention there is kind of one little wrinkle in this for amazon. serviceually have a right now that they charge third parties for managing their taxes. typically about 2.5% to 3%. for all that headache, you 12,000about the different tax jurisdictions. so if there is a universal tax doescongress actually pass, a simplified tax code in retail, for example, 5% across board, that may have a negative impact on that business. but to answer your question, we what the termsow of this are obviously, because still decide. to i don't know what the timing on that is. i would say the probability that holisticsome sort of view on online taxes is extremely high by the year end. above 90% chance that we get something. >> andrew, you have a little bit timeline.e how does this play out? >> traditionally, it takes congress about five to eight to address a supreme court

decision. so it would be great if they could address something by the end of the year. we haven't seen congress getting their act together on things that are even this significant. so it's pretty hard to say. to see something by the end of the year. but it's difficult to say whether they'll be able to do something. although we do have a couple of bills that are already there. just reintroduce one of the bills that are pend. talkingybe we'll be about this at the end of the year, maybe in five to eight knows?who andrew and gene, thank you so much. gene, you're going to be back with us a bit later. coming up, the shake-up that has the chip industry. intel outed brian krzanich. for the u.s.'s largest chip maker. if you like bloomberg news, us on out on bloomberg.com.

>> a shocking shake-up at the top of the biggest u.s. chip maker. c.e.o. brian krzanich has resigned, after the company consensualhad a relationship with an employee, a policy.n of intel bob swan has been named interim c.f.o. krzanich oversaw intel through an era of intense competition and consolidation and the chip industry as well. krzanich also leaves much unfinished. was in the midst of trying to remake intel into a more general chips, targeting self-driving cars, and navigating the company through a chip design flaw. here to discuss, we have the and bloomberg

tech's ian king. moreyou probably know about intel than any other journalist in the world. what happened here? >> yeah. this is obviously shocking. this happened all of a sudden. and we're still looking into happened, who it was, what kind of a relationship there was. so, you know, this is very much an ongoing process. company is just trying to draw a line and move on. but i don't think they're going allowed to let that happen. clearly we're in an environment, as you know and as you wrote yourself, where this kind of behavior, this kind of thing is no longer just something that swept under the table and this won't be. >> and actually, frank was one executives out there -- brian krzanich was one of the executives who was an advocate of the "me too" movement. >> exactly, if you look at his you can see all of the statements he made. he included women being that workplace. there just aren't that many

women at all. so he's out there. the public faces of let's do something about this. and then this happens. >> they also significantly foreased referral bonuses diverse candidates as part of this diversity push. i want you to take a look at chart, which shows intel's growth, under krzanich. your team has had the opportunity to meet with brian several times. how did this strike you? >> at this point, we actually ago.ith him a few weeks and i have always had a tremendous amount of respect for brian. always been very, you know, straightforward and candid questions, to our which as an analyst, i can tell you is a rarity. i thought he did a good job under his tenure. company grew revenues by more than $15 billion. share by earnings per almost 100%. >> now, ian, intel has always,

promoted from within. could they break tradition here? and go for an outsider? >> yeah. mean, they're in an interesting situation here where they haven't really faced -- a plan all the time. they've had this, you know, we'll encourage executives to and then we'll see who really sorts themselves out, comes to the front of the pack. president, thee c.e.o. then we have a clear succession policy in place. that obviously isn't the case now. krzanich has been so dynamic in bringing in people from the outside. lot of the people who would be the natural kind of successors or the people who would this kindstep in, in of a situation, aren't there. they're gone. got rid of them, right? or they at least left because they didn't want to stay. and so that does leave something of a vacuum in terms of that continuity. yes, intel is definitely going to have to widen its viewpoint in terms of where it next. >> now, the interim c.e.o., bob

swan, he was on bloomberg couple months ago, talking about the accomplishments over the last couple of years, the challenges ahead. take a listen. >> over the course of the last couple years, we have expanded our served market. where we used to focus primarily on cpu's, we now focus on the data and demands for we can be a differentiator. so our product portfolio cpu's, artificial intelligence. p.c.,'sdata center, for autonomous vehicles. we've dramatically expanded the serve.that we >> who are the most likely contenders here, and should it be an insider or an outsider? think if they go the inside route, i think it's -- i think candidate is probably murphy, who is effectively their engineering officer. i also think there's some

outside candidates that intel seriously consider. you know, you highlighted jah, former qualcomm executive. powerhouse until recently. somebody who is respected by shareholdersargest in the sector. broad com has done a phenomenal job. be a big change, big break in culture for intel. that -- atre the two least in terms of outsiders, that come to mind. culture, ian.k in i want to go back to renee a womanecause this is who pitched with krzanich to he becamesident and c.e.o. and she left him so fast. revelations shed any light on why she left, or could she be a candidate here? basically left the company and now has set up

which isompany, effectively competing with intel, trying to get into the intel's home, turf. that's not the actions of somebody that feels a lot of loyalty and affection, at least for the current leadership of intel. would she be on the list? we'll have to see. mean, if they're open about diversity, if they're open thet, you know, looking at candidates who might make the most sense, she would certainly somebody they should put on their list. >> what would you like to see, challenges intel has ahead, given the consolidation in the industry, this chip design flaw they're still trying to get there? >> i thought they brought in a world-class c.f.o. in bob swan. i would like to see them go externally. a tremendous opportunity as an investor in intel. the company obviously has very today, which i think will continue.

they are struggling, though. they're struggling with their manufacturing execution. at times they've looked wasteful in terms of who they bought and how much they spent. if you bring in the right executive with a good track record, i think there's a really forendous opportunity intel's multiple to rerate. know, the current price could actually be very attractive entry point. we'll see who that person is. it's pure speculation at this point. this change as an shares.ity in intel >> we crunch the numbers, leaving $45 million on the table. >> that's right. lot of money. a big mistake. theto his point, all of things that brian said he was going to do at intel, he put the ininnings of those things place. but none of them have yet manifested themselves. they're still riding that server business, still doing really well at what they've always done

well at. believe some of the counterparts elsewhere, that train is going to come to the its run in the near future. they need somebody who can either execute on what he said find a newg to do or way forward for them. >> al right. thank you both. we'll continue to follow. i know you are continuing to dig on this. announces itsle plans to stream children's programming, partnering with the of sesame street. we're going to break down plan.s this is bloomberg. ♪ bloomberg. ♪

>> it is an arms race in streaming, with the competition trying to outspend one another high-profile deals. just this spring, netflix signed a production deal with former president barack obama and first lady michelle. announced a deal with academy award winner jordy peal. few weeks later, apple announcing it signed one of the

most influential people in winfrey.rah my next guest says apple will spend just under a billion this is still behind netflix on rolling out new shows. us a global bloomberg's we have carolina in london. netflix stock keeps going up. can apple compete here? >> well, they can compete in a big way, because obviously they've got the resources to do it. they're gonna lag. theably we estimate over next five years, they'll spend probably about $15 in original content. probably be about $45 billion. i just want to give people some why apple can be a major player here. 2013,rewind the clock to netflix had 13 original series. those in the 17 of pipeline. they're kind of five years behind. a distinctve advantage over netflix. that is the power of the

operating system. we've seen that play out with apple music. subscribersmillion a year and a half ago, 50 million today. these nudges, these notifications that you periodically get to sign up for apple services. thing that ind of think netflix should be worried about, because we know, even onugh apple has messed up content to date, we know that if at the pipeline they have now, they're gonna get this right and have quality content a unique distribution to compete against netflix. you've got analysts $500,000, with a target on netflix -- does that make sense? >> it makes sense in that context that content, an overused phrase, longstanding of content is king. you can see how things can get

disrupted. behink that there can multiple winners in here. i would look at it a little bit different. view appleple who shares don't typically give original content a second thought. that is anething afterthought for investors. but i think this is something that can be a very big business. this ultimately could account for 3% to 5% of apple's total be a very profitable part of their revenue. and it's all incremental. at it more from the perspective of the tech companies are uniquely thationed and apple is one is uniquely capitalized to go after this. thealk to us about international picture here, because amazon has made strides acquiring global sports rides.ming netflix, you know, has shown very solid international user growth. is this anyone's game? abroad? yeah.eel like it is, netflix has got, what, 125 million subscribers. basedf them internationally. latin america is growing.

earmarking about $1 billion for european projects. where i sit right now, it's a big focus point for the likes of netflix. they had real content wins by partnering with itv bbc.os, they've been making such groundbreaking content. them.one so well for that's why they're really buckling down on european content. it. amazon, you mentioned big moves into sports. it's the premier league, all call it soccer. but they really have been going to showy're 20 gains. that's not much that skye, for example, shows. but still, showing where the desire is. they want to get this content, whether it be sports, original movies and broadcastings and series, to be able to get more more subscribers to prime to push it above the 100 million users. be the 125 million users we see over at netflix.

this just spurs more competition likes of hulu but also skye in the u.k., which is not alsoa cable network but has a streaming facility itself. so much changing. there's a note out that the disney-fox behemoth will be weaker than the original and that, you know, netflix is winner. you've got at&t rolling out over the top. apple meantime making deals for children's shows, ofng a deal with the makers sesame street. a lot is in flux. what's going to determine who and who are the losers? the think the library and distribution, those two. one thing, a unique advantage that netflix does have is this international piece you're just talking about. that piece is something that apple is not as interested in. have a thousand -- hard to believe that number, but 1,000x has said they want different series titles in the next year.

and apple is going to be much less than that. i think that those two are clearly going to be winners. challenges that traditional media is going to have here is around the distribution. oftalked about the power having the operating system. and also, just a good understanding like netflix does and retaino capture some users. and so i think that it makes with what's happened netflix stock. i'm -- iiased because view the world more from a tech perspective. but i think that the tech companies, because of the operating system, and the customer acquisition, are of being theble content companies of the future. >> all right. watching the battleground. thank you both. pentagon wants to put cyber commands on the offensive. prizeak to pulitzer winning journalist on the risks possible cyber war, next. next.

emily: this is "bloomberg technology." i'm emily chang in san francisco. u.s. cyber command is ready to go on the offensive. the pentagon has made a notable change in its strategy for a division that until now was primarily a shield against cyber attacks. just last month, the state department issued a report saying the government needs to come up with a new strategy for stopping cyber intrusions. what does it mean for american cyber defense or offense? to answer that, i want to bring in pulitzer prize-winning journalist and national security correspondent for the new york times david sanger, who is out with a new book on cyber warfare called "the perfect weapon: war, sabotage, and fear in the cyber age." you compare cyber weapons to the invention of the atomic bomb.

give us the lay of the field. where are the biggest threats? who are they coming from? sangeer: the first comparison i do is the invention of the airplane. when the airplane came in and wrightht brothers -- the brothers showed it to the first military, their first response was, "this is great. we will put it up over the enemy troops, see where their vulnerabilities are, and send in the cavalry." it was about four years before people began dropping bombs with airplanes and ultimately dropped the atomic bomb, the ultimate culmination of technology. it gave them the reach and the power. for cyber, we are just at that world war i period were we have gotten past the fact that cyber will just be used for surveillance. we understand that you can arm it and blow up iranian centrifuges with it, but we keep discovering other vulnerabilities that take up by

-- that take us by surprise, and that is what the russia hack was all about. just think, the election system was not on the department of homeland security's list of 18 areas of vulnerability. the underpinning of our democracy, and it wasn't him a list. emily: is that where the biggest threat is coming from? is it russia? mr. sanger: the four big actors asiscussed in the book american adversaries are russia, china, north korea, and iran. the russians are the most savvy. the chinese are the most determined but more interested in theft of intellectual property and so forth. that may change over time. and the iranians and north koreans see this great leveler. they know that for all their pursuit of atomic weapons, they are never going to use an atomic weapon. they can't. they know what the next 45 minutes would look like. whereas cyber, you can dial up and you can dial down. you mentioned the cyber command

change in strategy, which is in the book. timese about this in the earlier this week. here, you have to think about sort of counterterrorism strategy. for a while, we were saying we are going to go inspect everything coming into the border to see if there is a bomb aboard a freighter or an airplane, and in counterterrorism strategy post 9/11, we started knocking down houses in pakistan where you thought the bomb makers were at work. that is what cyber command wants to do. they want to make -- go to a place where code is being developed to attack the united states. the problem is, you take that out and the country you have hit says, wait a minute. for ae just doing coding kindergarten through third grade educational software. emily: how open is the trump administration to being on the cyber offensive, and do they understand it? mr. sanger: really good question. when john bolton came in to be national security adviser, the

first thing he did was fire the two people who knew the most about cyber. one was the homeland security adviser, who has been replaced by someone from the coast guard. the other was a long time nsa employee who had run the unit -- the tailored access operations unit of the nsa, the unit that breaks into foreign computer systems. he was a cyber offense of expert, and they not only got rid of him, they eliminated the position and cannot really explain to us or haven't explained to us why other than to say, "well, cyber is everywhere. it's part of everything we do." emily: how well armed is the u.s. now? is it too little, too late? mr. sanger: we are very well armed, and we have absolutely no strategy around the armament. we have been investing in the weapons. you can tell. the operation against iran was big. in the book, i describe a

similar operation of dubious success against the north korean missile program, but we have not developed a doctrine under which -- that would decide when we will use these weapons and when we will not, and we will not even talk about this to the public. if you won't do that, you cannot begin to set guide rails of what is off-limits. election systems, no one should attack. civilian infrastructure that supports hospitals, no one should attack. communication systems used by emergency workers, no one should attack. emily: and yet, they are being attacked all the time. mr. sanger: they are. part of the message of the book is, the solution is not just technology. we have to do better on technology, but you will always be playing catch-up in cyber defense. there has to be the beginnings of political solutions. emily: is there hope for that in this administration? mr. sanger: so far i have not seen much of it. there was discussion in the obama years of cyber norms and there was a u.n. group set up to go do it. the last discussions they had

last summer broke down, not really because of the trump administration. really because of the chinese, but if you do not begin to discuss how to control the technology, you are going to end up being on the losing side of it. emily: u.s. infrastructure has been undermined, attacked. we are heading into the midterms. is it happening now? will it keep happening? will our elections be undermined again? mr. sanger: good question. one thing that helps is this time americans know a little bit about what this looks like from the russia hack. does not mean it will look the same way the next time, but in france, with the warning of what happened to us, the fake facebook posts and all that did not have a lot of effect because people were identifying this as coming from russia. what worries me about our next election, not just 2018 by 2020, is there will be other countries that will learn from what the russians did and will devise new approaches, and the constant

problem in cyber is, you are always behind the eight ball. the attacker is always thinking of new ways in, which is why you are seeing new defense technologies that look at behavior instead of just past patterns, but we also need to begin to think about what the geopolitical solution for this is. emily: how vulnerable, even though they have new information, is facebook to being turned into a weapon again? mr. sanger: less vulnerable than they were two years ago, when they were clueless. emily: but they move. emily: but, as you say, they moved. mr. sanger: they move. i have talked to a lot of people at facebook. emily: the set -- the security officer who is no longer the head of security of facebook. missed a hacksy because they weren't looking for them.

they didn't understand the behavior on their platform. that could happen again. emily: let's talk about north korea because you reported on the u.s.'s efforts to disrupt north korean missile systems. talk a little bit more about how that happened. sanger: kim jong-un, the same one who showed up in singapore with a friendly smile -- emily: you were in singapore. : yes.nger we saw him hanging out with the millennials at hot nightspots. emily: got to get your groove on. mr. sanger: not what you would expect of the north korean leader, but it was good he was there, and he liked seeing what another society looked like, but he was launching something a couple of years ago, and my -- and my colleague and i noted that they were having an 88% failure rate on something that was a pretty well-established technology. we dug into it and sure enough found what we expected we would find, which is a program

president obama had accelerated called left of launch. if you think of the moment of launch and you are aiming missile efforts to intercept those and after the launch, left of launch is what you do to keep the missile from getting lost, -- from getting launched, and that is everything from feeding in bad parts to cyber attacks on the command and control systems. the problem is we cannot tell what percentage of their high failure rate was because of the u.s. program and what was because they were north koreans making mistakes -- bad welding, that engineering -- bad engineering. that's part of the difficulty with cyber. you don't know how well your weapons are working. emily: is this why kim jong-un came to the bargaining table, and wilma north koreans stay there? how optimistic are you? mr. sanger: i think he came for a variety of reasons, number one, the sanctions, and maybe even being scared of donald trump's threat.

having to get some of the sanctions lifted. i wish i could be more optimistic. i think the president did the right thing in trying to go meet him and talk to him. we have not tried that since the end of the korean war in 1953, but that said, the agreement they came up with was much more vague than what kim's father and grandfather signed onto. there was no timetable for performance. emily: david sanger, thank you so much for stopping by. mr. sanger: great to be with you. emily: still ahead, push-ups, coaching sessions, a live-in chef preparing you for your next -- for the highest quality fuel for your competition. it's the regime of a modern sports star, the video gamer. next. ♪

emily: the largest radio broadcaster in the united states has turned down an offer from liberty media. i heart media formally rejected the bid, slightly less than $1.2 billion, for a 40% stake and said other talks are continuing with other interested parties. the company is working its way through bankruptcy. well, are you looking for a job, one that lets you gunned him a competition, fight off hordes of alien invaders, let you be part of a team of top athletes with rapid twitch fingers daca -- ready to go? one that pays you signing bonuses? maybe e-sports is for you. aofessional video gaming is 1.5 billion dollar industry and getting a new wave of teenagers and twentysomethings a shot at celebrity. >> just imagine living in this $15 million home. you are paid a steady salary

, supported by a whole team of staff, whose sole purpose is to get you to play at your best. >> let's go. >> if you don't perform, you are cut from the team. >> here we go. round three. round three. keep it going. no breaks. >> if you think this sounds like the life of a pro athlete, you would be right. kind of. it's is the life of the future, -- of the sports player of the future, lived by the lucky few today. >> my name is michael. i'm a professional gamer. for someone who is uneducated in the e-sports scene and doesn't understand how it works, the way i would describe it is it's kind of similar to a professional athlete. it is a lot of preparation, hard work, and team effort. there is a guy above me. >> trust me, he is not. aki: ghost gaining plays players

like mike to play in videogame battles, and yes, that is a real job now. more people watch video games hulu, espn, and hbo put together. it's already a billion-dollar industry. that is how ghost can afford to shower players with all kinds of perks like this team house, a 10-bed, 16-bath mansion overlooking hollywood. it houses 10 players at a time, all in their late teens and early 20's. >> when most people look at the house we are living in, it's a bunch of teenagers, and it's a lot of us, so you would think it's rowdy, we're just reckless, but we are professional e-sports players. aki: here's the day of a professional gamer. >> i wake up 9:00, 9:30.

breakfast. chest up, let's go. 11:00 a.m., we have workouts. that lasts for an hour to an hour and a half. after lunch, we play from 1:30 to 7:30. that's just a long grind of playing against other talented teams. we play from lunch to dinner. >> how are you doing, mike? aki: mike did not want to discuss his contract, but when he joined ghost, it was reported he and his teammates shared a $50,000 signing bonus and were each offered $4000 month salary. on top of that, he sells his own

-- fans watched -- paid to watch him on twitch and he sells his own line of apparel. but like professional sports, gaming is not a lifelong career, and there is a ton of turnover. three months after i met mike, ghost dropped him from the team and he's now back in new jersey. >> this sounds really tragic and could end a player's career, but it's common in the scene. players get released and switched around all the time. my advice to young gamers who want to play professionally, you have to be patient and dedicated and understand it is going to take sacrifice, because there is always another person trying to take your spot. i don't have any plans to give up my gaming career. i will bounce back from this, and make my mom and dad proud.

emily: i want to bring in "bloomberg tech's" aki ito. down in the hollywood hills, shooting that story. do all pro gamers live like this? aki: no, they don't. this is the best of the best. it is true that they are earning bigger salad -- salaries, signing bonuses, getting perks. but maybe not that glamorous. emily: why do they need a personal chef and a personal trainer? you play video games all day, that is unhealthy and you need to correct some bad habits, get them on low card -- low-carb diets. emily: the characters we saw here, what are they up to now? aki: mike just signed on with a new team. we heard him in the video talk about how he was going to bounce back, and he did. emily: tell us a little bit about the inspiration behind the series. and what we will see. aki: as a technology journalist, i spend a lot of time talking

about the jobs technology is replacing, and that is a very real concern, but it's harder to see the jobs technology is creating, so i want to go out and find those. the jobs that kids now once they graduate from high school or college grad school could go into in the future. emily: i have three boys. is this the life that awaits them? aki: possibly. emily: i am ok with the salary, just not the coach. aki: just get them a personal trainer. emily: thank you for joining us. 911 call centers around the country will soon be able to accurately locate those in need of help. we speak with the ceo partnering with apple to make this a reality next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: the 911 system has been operating in the u.s. for decades but has been slow to adapt to new technology. the majority of people now call 911 on their mobile devices, but call centers cannot access a crucial piece of data from that device, and that is there location. the startup rapid sos is changing that. a new partnership was announced with apple this week. the ceo joins us from new york. first of all, how backwards is the united states here? i find it shocking in 2018 that they cannot access our location from a cell phone. >> it is remarkable. 911 operators do extraordinary work, managing over 600 50,000 emergencies every single day in the united states. but america's 911 infrastructure dates back to the 1960's and 1970's in most parts of the country, so the result is when you call 911, there is almost no data available from that call.

it is primarily a voice-based system still today. emily: why can uber find me, but 911 cannot? >> uber is operating over modern 9 -- technology pathways. 911 is operating on the telephone switch network. call 911, 911 is not getting your name and they have a hard time locating you quickly around that emergency. emily: other countries are way ahead in terms of this. they can tell down to what floor you are on. mr. martin: it depends. all sorts of countries implemented 999 or 112 in different ways. in the united states, we developed a system in 1960 eight and since then, it has been a challenge because we have a fragmented system. over 6911 centers running a proximately 5000 software systems.

is an antiquated infrastructure that sits behind our 911 system. emily: how does your partnership with apple work, and how will it change my iphone? mr. martin: apple announced on monday at the national emergency center operator conference, that when a user dials 911, the location information, the information we use every day in apps like uber will be transmitted security lee -- securely and robustly directly to the 911 operator that is managing the call. the result is we expect a meaningful improvement in terms of response time and outcomes of emergencies. emily: talk to us about other partnerships. apple is not the only maker of mobile phones. mr. martin: our clearinghouse is really to support any type of data. what we spent the last five years developing, in partnership with public safety, is the ability to universally push life-saving data from any

connected device to the hands of 911 and first responders. we work with digital health companies to pass real-time health and medical data. we work with automotive companies to pass tele-metric data during a crash. industrial iot sensor data, directly into the fire department. we have disclosed our partnership with uber. microsoft is an investor. you are seeing broadly, silicon valley starting to embrace all this data that they can use to save lives. emily: tell us about the work you are doing with uber and how that might be a prelude to other like deals. mr. martin: we announced back in april that starting in six cities now, if you have an emergency while you are on an uber ride, you can press a button and share information in real-time about your location and other information associated with the ride, the make and model of the vehicle and other information, so first responders will be able to pinpoint your location and get to you faster

and they are also going to identify the nature of the emergency more rapidly, so it can really help offset and improve response in those circumstances. emily: in a new era of privacy concern, how do you handle dealing with all the sensitive data and consumers who may not want first responders to another -- to know there location? mr. martin: to be clear, this information is only shared during a 911 call, and it's fully encrypted and uses a similar type of technology you would use with mobile banking, for security, and that is only available to the 911 call taker that is managing the call. otherwise, there's no access to that data. emily: michael martin, thanks so much for sharing. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology" from san francisco. i'm emily chang. we are going to be back tomorrow. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> 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. lori: i really dfe