emily: i'm emily chang, and this is "best of bloomberg technology," where we bring you all our top interviews from tech. coming up, our exclusive interview with microsoft's ceo, satya nadella. his take on security and competition with amazon in the cloud. plus, the red cyber threat. a new report reveals that targeted protrusions by chinese hackers are on the rise. crowdstrike's chief technology officer outlines the sectors most under attack.

and snap is turning to television to keep teens hooked. we talk about their push into original programming and whether it will pay off. first to our top story and our exclusive sit-down with microsoft's ceo satya nadella on wednesday from the naval academy in annapolis. this week, microsoft boasted it will obtain security authorizations early next year, bolstering the company's position in the pentagon's winner take all competition for a multibillion-dollar cloud computing deal. nadella sat down with our own caroline hyde for an extended interview wednesday. they spoke about the race for the pentagon deal, artificial intelligence, and of course a topic on everyone's mind, data privacy. satya: microsoft, all of our existence, we have always had the department of defense as a customer, and many other federal agencies. in fact, tomorrow, we have our government summit, where we will talk about everything we are doing from the department of

labor to the department of agriculture, fema, and veteran affairs and so on. we are broadly investing in bringing cloud technology and our edge technology, which is more and more relevant and more and more of our taxpayer dollars being spent well so that we can get more efficiency out of the i.t. infrastructure that needs to power all of these institutions. we are very focused on making sure we bring the best technology and compete in any of these contracts that get put out for competitive bids. caroline: does it ever -- with a focus on security, which must be front of mind when you are serving anything federally, whether you are serving the government -- how much do you think there is a focus at the moment on security and you as a company have managed to find midterm election potential attacks coming from the likes of russia.

how are you looking at cybersecurity? how are you ensuring that you are at the cutting edge, and is it tackleable at the moment? satya: i think that some of the best work we are doing when it comes to even a.i. is to help with the cybersecurity posture. in fact, i always say this, which is the most important thing we can do as a company and have as an asset is our cybersecurity, operational security posture. we have something like 6.5 trillion security events, 450 billion logins a month across all of our properties, 1.2 billion devices we scan, maybe a couple billion malware inspections. so all of that has to be converted into operational security and operational security help for our customers. i mean, a good example of that is what happened with strontium, basically we saw that that

attack group was attacking folks in the senate and affiliated groups in the republican party with phishing attacks. so we realized we need to get a hold of those domains and this is where it is not just about the technology, but even the policy work we did, and with working with the legal infrastructure to be able to transfer those domains and sinkhole the traffic. another example is nowadays, cyber criminals are targeting small businesses, and that is a big issue because consumers and small businesses suffer the most when it comes to cyberattacks. this group was attacking small businesses in johnson city, tennessee. we were able to detect this and get rid of it on first sight, which is really one of the big challenges of a.i. and so we are doing work there, as well as in iot. the next big security attacks

are not going to come from conventional email being compromised, it will come from the hvac system. so, nine billion microcontrollers are shipped in the world. we now have a silica and design as well as a secure operating system that help us ensure that all microcontrollers going forward can be secured. caroline: talking now about software issues and hardware issues and safety. you -- we have of course seen the "bloomberg businessweek" piece about concerns of supply chain strength. is this something that you think is fully secure when you look at microsoft and can be going forward, when you have such strength of attacks that you keep picking up on? satya: when it comes to our operational security, including silicon supply chain or software supply chain, it is all about every day being in the gym and practicing. and in our case, in this particular indicent, we are very confident we have no exposure,

but we are constantly -- we have a lot of people dedicated to it, a lot of technology, a lot of rigor and process dedicated to ensuring our supply chains are to be secure. caroline: wrapped up is his security conversation is that of privacy. do you think the legislative agenda is where it should be, regulation is where it needs to be, when it comes to privacy of individuals' data and when it comes to the security of company data? satya: these are a great set of questions, but we are already living in a world where the secular movement around individual data is that you should think of privacy as a human right and gdpr already legislates that. and so, we have done a lot of work implementing that in our products. and we have taken some of the rights from gdpr and made it available globally. so i think this is something the united states will look at. i know california has looked at it. we hope for more of a national

privacy law because we don't want increased transaction costs. that, in fact, will harm more small businesses than large companies like microsoft. if you really want a level playing field, i think having the legislative framework that reduces transactional costs and even causes new entrepreneurs to be able to adopt it is a very important thing. the other one i would say is clout act. i think the united states is pleased to see us because we have had to go to the supreme court and fight our own government on this case multiple times. but we did, we worked with legislative bodies to get the act passed. i think that creates a new equilibrium of how nations can balance their need for privacy on one end and national security on the other end, and this is something that i hope will be in bilateral deals between the united states and united kingdom

and other governments, which i think is very needed. caroline: you helm a fascinating company. it is more than 40 years old. it has been through its education process. it has looked at regulators over the years. it has evolved. it has ensured it is now one of the most valuable companies in the world, about $1 trillion. how do you look at some of the other big technology giants that have grown in the u.s. and seeing them have to evolve and catch up in some ways to the charges and arguments and resolutions you have had to find in your past? what experiences can you give them? do you think they are dealing with it in the right way as they evolve? satya: i can only speak for our own experience and what we are trying to do, and i think we as a tech industry -- i don't say this as some sort of terms of competition between us. when i look back in our own history from, say, 1975 till now, technology and its importance in our societies and economies has gone through a sea change.

the tech industry itself is just 5% of gdp. and yet i think its influence on the rest of the 95% is far greater than it ever has been in our history. and so therefore, i think all of us including microsoft and starting with us, is to be comfortable knowing that we will be held to a different standard, and that is what i think about at microsoft and how everything from our operational security posture to what is our ethics, how are we going to, in some sense, even go and ask for regulation where i think you create a rule of law and a framework for us to make progress, especially in liberal democracies. so i think that these are the places where there needs to be a level of maturity way beyond , i think, day-to-day competition. emily: microsoft's ceo satya nadella speaking exclusively with bloomberg's caroline hyde.

still ahead in the "best of bloomberg technology," fresh evidence in bloomberg's china hacking scoop. spy hardware discovered on the servers at a major u.s. telecom company. those servers were removed just a month ago. details, next. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. listen on the bloomberg app, bloomberg.com, and in the u.s. on sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: on tuesday, new evidence revealed a major u.s. telecommunications company was the latest caught up in the chinese computer hack revealed by "bloomberg businessweek." the company discovered the manipulated hardware from supermicro equipment in its network and removed it in august. bloomberg tech executive editor thomas giles explains. thomas: the supply chain remains under threat. the chinese do have ways of getting at the components that end up in our data centers, in u.s. data centers. in this instance, researchers working on behalf of this

telecom company found this -- it is a slightly different type of manipulation, but again, hardware was manipulated, hardware that originated in china, that made its way into the u.s. supply chain, had been manipulated, at its origin in china, and it was found out and has been removed. so what it does is it indicates that, again, parts of the supply chain do remain vulnerable. emily: and in this case you have a researcher who has come forward, named in the story and talked about -- tom: putting his reputation on the line, here. he talked about what they found, how they reached the conclusion they came to. we have seen the documents, we've run them by other people who do security, who understand how this works, and they have indicated to us his approach makes sense. emily: now, what was different in terms of how this hardware was compromised from the previous report?

tom: previously -- this has to do with ethernet connections, so this is what we use to connect telecommunications networks. that is what is different in this case. but what is similar is its supply chain originated in china and it has to do with hardware. and supermicro once again is the company at the heart. the researcher said supermicro was a victim here and it is not the only one used as a conduit, so we are definitely pursuing all those angles. emily: supermicro continues to deny even this latest story, saying the security of our customers and the integrity of our products are core to our business and our company values. we take sure to secure our products and supply chain security is an important topic of discussion for our industry. we have no knowledge of any unauthorized components and have not been informed by any customer that such components

have been found. you have apple and amazon continuing to deny the original story. you have u.s. and u.k. government officials weighing in and saying there is no reason to doubt the company's denial. how do we square that? tom: the companies have talked about their involvement. they have said we didn't discover these chips in our networks. so, again, we had to weigh that against what we have been told by a multitude of sources. emily: 17 unnamed sources, and now an 18th named source. tom: he is not talking directly about amazon and apple, to be clear. they have stuck to their denials. they are very detailed and we take them very seriously. dhs has come out. also as we said in our stories, it is possible that they aren't involved and don't have oversight over those agencies that are involved in the investigation that we've talked about, that we have written about. emily: why might the telecom industry have been targeted and what could be the consequences? tom: it is the telecommunications industry.

this is where -- these are the networks over which all of our communications, our emails, our phone calls are traveling. so, it would seem to me a logical target of someone who wanted to understand sensitive communications, or wanted to eavesdrop on i.t. we are not clear exactly what the intent was here. we are less clear than we were before, which was very much i.p. and communication over networks. less clear in this instance what the motivations would have been, but again, it's the telecommunications network, so pretty central to all of the communications that were traveling over our networks. emily: i know you and your team are continuing to report out this story. we are staying tuned for any developments. tom, thank you so much. we should note bloomberg lp has been a supermicro customer, but has found no evidence to suggest bloomberg was affected by the

hardware issues raised in the article. meantime, a new report from cybersecurity firm crowd strike reveals china poses the largest cyber threat over the past six months. the report reveals chinese adversaries have made targeted and persistent intrusion attempts at multiple sectors of the economy, from biotech and defense, to pharma and transportation. i spoke to the chief technology officer and asked him about both pressing matters. dmitri: the big headline from the report really is that china is back. when you look at the last couple of years, we saw decline in chinese nation state-sponsored intrusion against the commercial sector in 2016 right after the obama administration struck that agreement with president xi that both companies would stop conducting industrial espionage against each other. the chinese largely abided by that agreement for the time, but in the last year-and-a-half, we started to see pickup in activity, and now we are seeing a lot of intrusions in all

sectors of the economy, whether it is biotech, pharmaceutical, professional services, hospitality, insurance, mining, all kinds of sectors where the chinese are breaking in and stealing intellectual property. and now, as opposed to before, is mostly the state security, civilian intelligence arm is doing most of the activity versus the liberation army, the military that was doing a lot of that activity before 2015. emily: now, bloomberg has published an extensive investigation that found that the chinese implanted spy chips on the motherboards of supermicro servers that then ended up at some 30 u.s. companies and the u.k. and u.s. governments. what is your reaction to this report? we have also got a new story out today that a similar one was found at a u.s. telecom. dmitri: well, supply chain has always been a concern and we are actually seeing china, russia, and others leveraging their software supply chain in their

attacks where they are compromising software and leveraging the updates for that software to introduce malicious code. we have not personally seen any hardware-based attack like the ones the stories are talking about. the thing about hardware is it's physical, someone can physically verify whether there is an implant on their systems or not. there is a lot more to learn still as this story is unfolding. emily: i should mention the companies involved have denied this. u.k. and u.s. government officials have said there is no reason to doubt the denials, but that said, is this in the scope of something the chinese are capable of? dmitri: it is certainly possible. this seems like a very expensive and very difficult effort to go through to achieve that objective, knowing of course that they are able to do that through compromised software supply chains or direct

intrusions into companies like what we are seeing now. it is not out of the realm of possibilities, but there are a lot of questions to be answered here. emily: based on your reporting, what are you most concerned about? you talk about the relationship between nationstates, government arms, and their criminal counterparts within those nationstates, and that you are continuing to see a blurring of these lines. dmitri: that's right. we are seeing increasing the criminal groups adopting nationstate techniques, nationstate tools and tradecraft, in order to break into organizations. increasingly, as nationstates are coming out with innovations, a lot of the new exploits and discovering new vulnerabilities, very quickly that dissipates into the criminal underground and those criminals are now using those techniques to break into companies. the bigger threat to companies is destructive attacks like the wannacry attacks and those types of attacks we have seen from russia and north korea respectively in the past year,

and those types of attacks can take down organizations for weeks at a time. we have worked on a number of cases around those attacks last year and companies have suffered literally tens of millions of dollars, some hundreds of dollars in damage because of those attacks. emily: we have a midterm election coming up, how concerned are you about the security and integrity of those elections? dmitri: well, in general, election systems remain quite vulnerable. candidates in particular are still not focusing as much as they should be on security and the security of their campaigns. it is a very difficult problem given the nature of the campaigns and oftentimes they have volunteers working on personal devices. however, we are not seeing any major interference efforts in this election cycle, in the midterms, but it is always a concern. emily: so, what is the best defense at this point? dmitri: it's interesting, because the u.s. government, the white house has come out with their cyber strategy in the last couple of weeks that outlines

the fact that deterrence needs to be a big focus going forward. deterring nationstates like russia, china, north korea, iran from conducting these activities in the first place. we cannot just focus on defense alone. we need to find pressure points against those nationstates. they don't necessarily have to be cyber. they can be economic, diplomatic, leveraging really the full toolkit of u.s. power with allies to pressure nationstates to stop orchestrating these attacks against us. emily: you also document increased targeting of the biotech industry. how successful have those attacks been and what are the consequences? dmitri: well, this has been a big focus for china in the last year-and-a-half. we are seeing a lot of intrusions into biotech startups and more established companies, and this is all part of the chinese made in china 2025 plan they are working towards, where they want to see china being a major competitor on the global stage in this sector as well as other sectors. they want to see domestic

industry thrive in those sectors, and they are doing that in part by stealing our intellectual property to understand what mistakes not to make and where to place their bets. emily: it is clear china has these ambitions. it is clear that china is a threat, as you have so well detailed. do you think the response from u.s. companies and u.s. and u.k. governments should be to move the supply chain or to sort of divert some of these products that are being made in china to other countries? dmitri: well, there is no question that if you are operating in china, if you are manufacturing things in china, if you are developing in china, you have to worry about the compromise of your supply chain, you have to worry about intrusions from chinese competitors and sometimes even chinese partners into your networks that are stealing intellectual property. there needs to be done more to

confront china and the chinese government on these issues. the trump administration has started toward that with a report that the trade administration released earlier this spring outlining in almost 300 pages the things chinese are doing to steal intellectual property, and that is something continued focus going forward. we cannot allow them to take our intellectual property. the richness of this country the drives innovation and steal that wholesale. emily: crowdstrike's co-founder dmitri alperovitch. coming up, tesla shares soared tuesday. the company is on track to reach profitability. is it time to talk about a tesla turnaround? this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: facebook is going head-to-head with amazon and google with its first ever smart speaker unveiled monday. and it comes with a display for

optimize video chat. it's designed to simplify video chatting and it can track and follow your movements. so if you move, so does the camera. rather than constantly adjusting the phone, it automatically identifies people in the room and keeps them in the frame. people have seen similar devices like the amazon echo show. will this be considered creepy or convenient? the vice president of portal joined us to answer that question. >> it's a great speaker, a great video playing device, and it's a -- it incorporates alexa for a general home assistant. it's obviously a device where privacy is paramount and very important. we have tried to tackle privacy from the ground up. the fact we have to hold the hardware and software to change the way people communicate allowed us to put privacy in every layer. emily: facebook vice president there. up next, another bullish call

from tesla gave shares a boost this week. we will talk tesla turnaround just ahead. you can check us out at technology. you can follow us and our global breaking news network at tictoc on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

comcast business built the nation's largest gig-speed network. then went beyond. beyond chasing down network problems. to knowing when and where there's an issue. beyond network complexity. to a zero-touch, one-box world. optimizing performance and budget. beyond having questions. to getting answers. "activecore, how's my network?" "all sites are green." all of which helps you do more than your customers thought possible. comcast business. beyond fast.

emily: welcome back to the "best of bloomberg technology." i'm emily chang. tesla shares soared after macquarie joined the bulls, saying the company is on track to reach profitability. so is it time to talk about a tesla turnaround? the macquarie senior analyst joined us to explain his call. >> i think the most important thing really is that elon musk is really just focus on building model 3's and getting deliveries out there. anything that gets the focus down to that is a positive thing. so if james murdoch is the one who can rein him in and prevent some of that the tweets going , out, then the focus really

comes back to the deliveries, the fundamentals of the business i think it will be positive for the company. emily: the question is can james , murdoch rein him in? murdoch has been on the board and elon musk's behavior has been as it has been. max: i think the reigning in is going to have to come from elon himself. sort of his larger-than-life profile, the extent to which his sort of personality has defined tesla, i think if you believe in his company, you hope elon will see the light. not that the sec or a board member or someone else is going to do that for him. if we have seen anything, learned anything over the last few months it is that elon, even when tesla has been dinged for various reasons, he is willing to, you know, kind of be his own person. i think yeah the chairmanship is , important and an important milestone for the company, but i do not think that alone will bring much change. emily: talk to us about how you came to your conclusion that

this is a buy, and in the face of, you know some staunch , opposition from the bears that i just mentioned early analysts -- and early analysts who believe tesla shares will go in the opposite direction? maynard: my big call is that we are taking an angle of looking at the sector from a disruptive perspective and from a technology angle which i have covered for the past 20 years. a lot of people will talk about electric and autonomous as being the kind of disruptors. we look at as kind of the enablers. this is going to enable a platform ecosystem. think about developers building and building applications directly on top of the car and turning that car into an application. you download something, press a button, and you turn the vehicle into a ridesharing vehicle, or you download a different app and turn it into a delivery vehicle. and ultimately, the reason why we are so bullish on tesla is that if you look at the commercial technology that is already built in the car, a lot of the platform ecosystem technology is already there. that's what makes this positive

long-term story for tesla. emily: we know production numbers over the last several weeks have looked good. we don't know if tesla can sustain the level over the next few weeks. you are optimistic here. you believe production numbers will look good and believe tesla will reach profitability. what has to happen for that to happen in your view? maynard: you are right. the outperformance is predicated on the near term and them being able to generate cash. we have done a lot of work on zero emission vehicle credits. and we think, in the back half of this year, they can generate somewhere in the neighborhood of around $500 million. there is no cost associated with this, so this is pure cash flow which i think helps in addition to the free cash flow generations i think they will get going into the third and into the fourth quarter. i also think they have unused debt commitments they can tap which will be more than enough to cover the debt commitments that are coming up over the next three quarters. emily: max, we are getting new information that tesla is

closing in on a $145 million plot for its china factory, obviously china a huge portion of the potential. what does this mean? max: this is a big deal. the chinese market for electric cars is massive. tesla really has not made much progress there at all. if tesla is able to get into the market and really sell some cars, that will go a long way to sort of improving its bottom line and just generating huge amounts of revenue. china, especially in the donald trump era, there are regulatory hurdles. so being able to find a location for this factory, that is an important kind of first step in terms of building a factory. emily: macquarie senior analyst maynard on wednesday. up next, putting tv in your pocket with a slew of new original productions. we will look at the strategy in just a moment. and the u.n.'s latest climate report paints a grim picture.

can tech play a role in saving the planet? that is ahead. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: snap will release a dozen original series on its mobile app as they announce a new lineup to maintain a grip on teen users and give it an edge over instagram. we discussed whether the play will be a success.

>> this is a completely new slate of programming. for a while, they have really encouraged outside content partners to make media, for snap. and then sort of build their brands on separate channels on the company's discover page. now they are doing it themselves in-house. i think they really want to demonstrate that they can do a kind of show that is mobile and goes directly to that younger audience that snap is known for reaching. the question is whether it will really attract users in growth down the line. emily: all of the shows are shot vertically. one of them is called endless summer, a successor to mtv's laguna beach. erin, is this the sneak secret to snap's future? >> yeah, i think that is going to be a big question. so far, snap has had limited traction with we think the content offerings. most of the time spent on snap

has been with the messaging part of the app, and that continues to be the place. the problem with that is messaging is not monetized as well. to monetize, they have to do things like the discover side with original content and original programming. that's the big question, and snap is not the only one to go after this. facebook with the watch cap, instagram announced instinet -- instagram tv netflix, amazon , prime. a lot of fragmentation on the content side. but yeah, i think for snap to do dollars,get more ad they will have to show more traction on these types of offerings. emily: and sarah, snap executives have come out saying these shows have been a success and they have multimillions of viewers. how many people are actually watching these shows? >> what matters is not how many people are watching individual shows, but whether that number grows. snap last quarter announced a decline in daily users for the first time. and that has caused a shockwave through the markets thinking

maybe this company will not get to a size big enough to compete with the facebooks and googles of the world for advertising dollars. what they really have to do is prove that the media aspect side can be a big moneymaker down the line. and there just isn't enough public information on how the shows are doing to really instill confidence. and certainly, wall street is not too excited about the shows. the stock is down today, hovering below $7 for the first time. emily: original content aside, how optimistic are you that snap can continue to grow? i mean they are losing , executives. you know, the redesign has been a bust. evan spiegel has said they have to get back to their roots, which is about communicating quickly. but you know, is it all enough to get back to growth? >> yeah that is a good question.

, we have not seen it yet. we are still cautious on snap overall. while getting back to the roots of communication, fast messaging, fast sharing of photos is important for them, it does not generate revenue like newsfeeds do with facebook. that is a problem they are trying to solve. you cannot have it both ways. you cannot be a good messaging app and make a lot of money on the advertising side with a great user side. we like to see more product innovation. i think originals could help. there was a stat that only 25% of users go to like the discover side of the app on a daily basis. that is a pretty low percentage not using these content services. spiegel recently released a very long memo to employees where he talked about how the company has lost focus and has to get back to its roots. some were making fun of his use of the word cheetah, the codename for this redesign. he didn't back away from cheetah entirely, but said it was not working so far, but everyone, as

a consolation prize, would be getting a cheetah themed sweatshirt. you know, what do you make of this memo? what do investors think of this memo? >> i spent a lot of time with evan spiegel earlier this year. and the memo echoed a lot of the same things he was trying to get across to me then which is that the company sees itself differently than the other social media platforms. they don't even see themselves as a social media company rather a messaging company with a media component, and that they want to allow people to experience the world differently. while evan is trying to communicate more directly to his employees and address some issues with clarity around the company's direction, a 15-page memo is not always the best way to get that across. and certainly, while some people thought this was a good eye into how spiegel thinks, others thought it was a little rambling , a little concerning.

i think he is still, he is still in that place where he has to prove that he is the visionary leader for the next era of snap. otherwise, you know an analyst , yesterday said they may have to raise money. there may be m&a down the line. the next quarter is going to be so crucial for the company's future. emily: i'm sure many of these tech ceo's don't love speaking to the press. but you know now they do. , we have seen mark zuckerberg mature. in his memo, evan spiegel talks about how he feels awkward walking around and even talking to employees. he does not love talking to the press. at this point, this many years into being a public company, do you think he has to grow up? do think he is still the right person to be leading this company? >> yeah that is a good question. ,it is less about the press but more about company execution. if you look at the shareholders letter, you talk about competitive modes, but at the same time you talk about

competitive modes, you lose a lot of users to instagram. they say their competitive mode is speed of delivery. you haven't heard of users complain on instagram or facebook that they are not getting pictures or texts sent fast enough or whatever. so it the letter was a little confusing. that's why stocks did not rally off of the letter. emily: raymond james, aaron kessler and sarah frier. coming up, the u.n. gives the world just one a -- one decade to get a handle on global warming. we look at how tech could be part of the solution next. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: the latest climate report from the united nations paints a grim picture. the world is teetering on the edge of failure when it comes to containing global warming, and the solution comes at a cost. the intergovernmental panel of climate change says the world must invest $2.4 trillion into clean energy every year through 2035 and cut the use of coal fired power to almost nothing by 2050 to avoid catastrophic damage from climate change. the report notes the atmosphere is already one degrees celsius warmer than it was at the start of the industrial revolution, in -- and predicts it will rise by three degrees by 2100. and that is double the pace targeted in the 2015 paris accord. so, will technology be able to save the planet? on monday, we spoke to our sustainability editor and an

expert in climate adaptation and resilience, and the founder and ceo of 427, a provider of market intelligence, on climate change. >> this is the report that was commissioned by the u.n. two years ago after the paris accords. and it doesn't deliver great news. it presents a very strict timeline that we have to reduce global emissions before 2030. they suggest that on something on the order of 55% or 60% cuts in global emissions below last year's levels by 2030, then zeroing out emissions by 2050. so that is a huge challenge. and represents ambition we have not yet seen, even from the nations that were so supportive of the paris agreement three years ago. emily: what is your take on

these numbers? >> well, the technology is there to reduce emissions, but we haven't been deploying it at scale or investing enough. and what the report points out as well is to keep emissions under a level that would limit the impact of climate change, we need to capture a lot of carbon emissions, and this is technology that is not ready at scale. emily: talk to us about how we get there. what will it take for the technology to be ready? >> for technology to be useful, someone needs to turn it on. nobody has turned on the technology to the scale that we need it. we do not have the political will in the u.s. and in other countries, it is not moving fast enough. we do not have the investments to follow suit. the technology is there for carbon free energy, for reducing emissions across a number of activities, and also for preparing and adapting to climate change, but we are not using it right now. emily: who needs to turn it on? who are the people who can make this happen, the companies that can make it happen?

>> the obvious answer is government, but governments may not be there yet. there is a lot going on in the private sector, and there has been mobilization from investors and from corporations to invest. that needs to come with a regulatory push. it cannot just be one. the companies that are pushing this type of effort are still a minority compared to the broader set of corporations out there. emily: what is the likelihood that big tech or big business could do some of this on their own? eric: we already see really hopeful stories from around the world of enormous investment in technologies that have matured, in some ways, faster than even close watchers of the space would have believed, particularly in solar, in wind power, and the electrification of automobiles. i would like to echo the point about the carbon capture technologies. these are very interesting projects that are getting a lot of attention and some money, but

i -- one thing that is worth considering we also saw today , the awarding of the 2018 nobel prize in economics to william nordhouse of yale university, and he spent most of the last three or four decades trying to understand the relationship between what cost of pollution is, what is the appropriate price for a ton of emissions, with the consequent reduction in emissions. and so, many economists will tell you that people respond to prices. people respond to incentives. and having a price on carbon, the economists will tell you, and there are many experiments around the world, may be needed to get these technologies up and running in time to meet the challenges outlined today in the report. emily: what are the consequences

if this stuff does not happen? you know, what is the difference between one degree celsius and three degrees celsius? emily: we are already seeing the consequences of not having done our homework before. and we are seeing it today. we see it with extreme weather events, hurricanes in florida. japan just had nine typhoons, in the past season which is , insane when you think about it. the impacts are already there, and it will only get worse. the half degree difference between one degree celsius and 1.5 degrees, it makes a tremendous difference. this is the average across the entire earth. and so you have to imagine the amount of changes that need to happen to move the needle by half a degree globally, and that means more extreme weather events, that means water scarcity. that means more wildfires, that means sees rising and losing our coastlines, and a tremendous amount of impact that we are not currently adequately prepared for. emily: in the meantime, you have some big companies like google, amazon, microsoft teaming up to developed ai to identify

impending famine. talk to us about how this works. a very was a, it was interesting project announced today by those particular tech leaders. the goal of that project is to look for natural and social metrics that when certain alarm bells go off among each of them, it may be an overall early warning signal. it could be interpreted as an early warning signal for famine. one thing that is interesting and gets lost in our sort of voluminous talk every day about big data and a.i. is climate and weather were sort of the original big data topics going back to the 1960's. pattern recognition and machine learning in some ways cut their teeth very early on these topics. and so four or five decades later now, what we are seeing is

this interesting marriage of highly sophisticated, highly advanced, cutting-edge a.i. being applied to less cutting edge, sort of government supported models that have evolved over the last few decades, and not -- and that combination of these, the old approach to modeling with the new a.i. tools is producing interesting startups at exactly the time we are going to need them most. emily --ic rustin and we should note that michael bloomberg, founder and majority owner of bloomberg news is a u.n. special envoy for climate action. one way to phase out fossil fuels is the push to electric cars. on that note, audi just unveiled and one ofhallenger, the most interesting approach was plugging the car in. audi has teamed up with amazon,

which will arrange installing home chargers for the car buyers. a contributor to bloomberg opinion weighed in. whatazon is going to use it calls its home services division to do installation of these chargers. and home services is one that i confess, i've never used before, because it is for infrequent big purchases, things you might only do once or twice in a home's lifetime, like a refrigerator or a washing machine or a home charger. so what this is doing is removing quite a bit of the friction out of doing something that you do not do that often. it is an intriguing way to just simplify a process. you may know what charger you want, and i am sure that audi would have a preferred set that is there for any given purchase. this just simple faisal the process of getting -- simplifies the process of getting somebody in the home to take care of the paperwork and do the connection for you. emily: what is the significance of this for amazon, assuming this is only a small sliver of their business, and for tesla,

for which this is a huge part of their business? >> it is a good question. i will take the tesla part first. so for tesla, and i gave a talk about this last week at a conference in london, it was essentially existential. you had this chicken and the egg problem, you can build great cars, but without a network, you can't really charge them up. without a lot of chargers, you will not sell a lot of cars. so for tesla, they built a network first. for amazon, this is far, far different from that in the sense that i doubt that this would be materially significant, even in any given decade in the future. but what is intriguing for to me is that it is getting amazon into the home in yet another way. emily: you do not think that this could become a much bigger business for amazon? >> so i went with a little thought experiment on it, which was, you know last week, or a , couple weeks ago, amazon released a new slew of alexa connected gadgets, and one was a microwave. what struck me about that is it simplifies a process that is full of menus, options, opaque

attempts to do something and you replace instead of saying, alexa, there is a slice of pizza in there, heated up for me. -- heat it up for me. my thinking was electric charging is another thing that is similar. it has a lot of latency in it, there is time involved, there are many decisions you could make, but probably you do not want to do. so my thinking was, let's say that amazon rolls out its own charger in the future, and you drive in and say, amazon, i am not going out not going out , tonight, so charge me up. let's imagine further that it is and all you want charging for your prime account, or something like that. emily: nat bullard, contributor to bloomberg opinion. that does it for this edition of the "best of bloomberg technology." we will bring you all the latest in tech throughout the week. you can tune in every day 5:00 p.m. in new york. 2:00 in san francisco. bloomberg technology is livestreaming on twitter. check us out and be sure to follow our breaking global news network. this is bloomberg.

♪

haidi: welcome to daybreak australia. shery: i am shery ahn. sophie: i am sophie kamaruddin. we are counting down to the major market open. haidi: here are the top stories we are covering. saudi arabia house to retaliate s a range ofweigh punishments for the missing journalist. considering a range of policy moves in china, including a worst-case scenario.