"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. ♪ brad: i am brad stone in san francisco filling in for emily chang. this is "bloomberg technology." in the next hour, netflix, the first a big tech to report earnings, third quarter subscriber growth that could impress, can the rest of the faang family do the same? plus, how a congressman wants to protect people online. in his internet bill of rights become the law of the land? and, lest than three weeks until midterms.

getting up to vote with celebrity driven voter registration. first to the top story. the nasdaq has seen its fair share of wild days and there is still some time to go. as earnings season picks up steam, investors are sifting through results for signs of strength and weakness to see if the ongoing trade war between the u.s. and china and higher interest rates are eating away at profits. earlier this week, netflix reported strong third-quarter. they signed up 6.9 billion customers, boosting the global total to 137 million customers. can this growth be enough to lift the family of faang stocks as they try to rebound from a global equity selloff? joining us to discuss is michael with bush managing -- michael, the bush managing director. the faang stocks are usually the first to report good earnings. it's not happen this week. what is going on?

>> clearly each reflects the overall economy and each is global. netflix in particular though, they have been a content story. as their content gets better, and especially up against a an easy comparison -- an easy comparison, they have seen subscribers join. they see fewer people quit. they have gotten to the critical mass on content where they keep something coming up virtually every week. it keeps their subscribers happy. they tend to turn less which drives the the overall net app. that is not the same for others. when people talk about a looming trade war with china, there is concern perhaps that throws the u.s. and globe into recession, which means you will see a depression of outspend ad spend. brad: luke, what are you seeing? are there macro factors here

like worries of at trade war, interest rates, and the situation was saudi arabia? luke: i'm sure the macro factors are playing somewhat of a role, but for me, the real story is the lack of halo effect in terms of netflix's strong results not rubbing off on the rest of the faang group. the part of that story is more related to something more technical and markets. it is an ongoing factor rotation. the faang group is what we like to call momentum stocks. they have generally had strong uptrends and invest that the market winners will keep winning. the stock tumble in recent weeks has been associated with a factor rotation to value stocks over momentum. what you see in the market now is, on an intraday basis, momentum and value are trading off day by day back and forth. they are searching for what the direction and leadership will be

and that is why the upcoming earnings from the rest of the big tech groups will be very important to resolve the shape of the market and market leadership from here out. brad: let's take these companies one by one. we have a pileup of earnings. including amazon on thursday. this quarter will reflect prime day. they have had a couple of quarters where they show really surprising amount of profit per share. what are you expecting from jeff asus and company -- jeff bezos and company? michael: they turned on a dime from stumbling in 2014. they were growing their spending faster than growth's profit dollars -- gross profit dollars. after 2014, they started spending less. we have them generating about $25 billion in gross profit growth in 2018 compared to 2017, and spending about 21 billion of that. that leaves 4 billion to drop to

the bottom line. when you only have 5 billion shares, you can generate massive earnings growth. they have thrown off almost a dollars a share. i think that trend continues. to coin a very famous authors term, everything is stored. they saw everything and this is where we go. our default searches are on amazon. we use the search on google. that is the one that will stand out. i do not think they can miss. brad: luke, let me ask you about facebook. so much controversy particularly with fake news and voter suppression efforts ahead of the midterms, and efforts -- and lists look at margin compression and operating expenses. luke: i think that is trivial to

analysts. i don't think facebook is a moral theater for people. it is a profit center. to that point, across the board with the faang stocks, we are seeing people are pricing in bigger implied moves from auctions. this earnings season more so than the previous three on average. they start of the year with relatively high expense guidance and then tend to trim that. on the one end, you have the creating expenses which are in part associated with your fake news monitoring costs. on the other end, you have the potential for less targeting abilities to crimp margins on the upper end in terms of what you are able to promise to add providers. analysts think facebook and offset it by having the lower ad

load commanding a premium on lower volume. brad: let me ask you about google, michael. they have had a miserable couple of months. they are clearly worried about government intervention -- intervention. what you expect next thursday from google? michael: i have been covering them a whopping two days so i am far from an expert. i think the streets have it wrong on this quarter. the thing to look at is the top line is expected to grow sequentially over $1 billion. the street things we will see a sequential decline in eps. i do not see how that is possible. the company warned marketing expenses would be higher, but this has marketing expenses like $1 billion higher sequentially which is crazy talk. i think google will blow numbers away. i think they figure out -- figured out the formula, don't spend all of your profit and investors reward you.

they pay their employees in stock, everybody who is a constituent of google cares about the share price so they will blow numbers away. the ad market is superstrong, google is diverse beyond search. they are clearly on mobile, have the map function, youtube, they are hitting on all cylinders. you will get a nice, positive surprise. brad: why china? why this dragonfly project and taking on such regulatory and reputational risk. michael: everybody would love to be in china. it is a large economy. you are right, it is a trade-off risk reward. risk is huge, reward is huge. i think google thinks they can dominate the market so they are willing to take regulatory and reputational risk. if they make execute, it will be

a huge black mark -- ms. execute -- misexecute, it will be a huge black mark. brad: we have to leave it there. michael pachter and luke, thank you much. coming up, saudi arabia and its bets on tact. will the journalist disappearance strain its relations with silicon valley? we discussed next. "bloomberg technology" is livestreaming on twitter. check us out @technology, and be sure to follow our global news network, @tictoc, on twitter. if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio, listen on the bloomberg app, bloomberg.com, and, in the u.s., sirius xm. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ brad: one of the latest developments in the disappearance of jamal khashoggi is twitter shutting down a network of bots pushing pro-saudi talking points. the report says hundreds of accounts simultaneously retweeted pro-saudi government tweets. turkey says khashoggi was murdered by people tied to the saudi government when he entered the consulate on october 2. saudi arabia denies the charges. this had led to plenty of high-profile executives dropping auto -- out of a saudi event. among them was the uber ceo, he whose company benefited from billions of dollars from saudi arabia. the future investment -- investment initiative will still proceed with the conference with an updated program. here to discuss is our next guest.

also with us is selina wang. thank you both for joining us. i'm imagining softbank's ceo sitting in than empty room next week. what kind of position is he in right now? a major partner of the saudi public pension fund and here he is abandoned by all of the other silicon valley ceos. >> i think folks in great positions like that can look at things from a broad perspective. in this case, looking at the saudi investments over the past decade, it has been impressive. they have been involved in deals like hundred million dollar deals with tesla and it deals with uber. those types of deals have been happening despite what the saudis have been doing as a country for the past decade. he has the benefit of perspective and we will see that

over the long term. brad: is there anything masayoshi son can do right now? saudi arabia is responsible for half of the vision fund and re-upping for a second one. what is he contractually able to do? selina: it is an extremely precarious position right now. they have committed 45 billion to the current fund and the upcoming fund. he can diversify and find other places to raise capital, but it is a very unique place where he can get such a large pool of capital every few years. this could really throw his entire fund out of whack. one of the main thesis of the vision fund is that they have unlimited capital to pour into these companies. it will be a difficult calculus in terms of what he does for signaling, attending the conference, and relationships with the saudi arabian

government. brad: this disappearance of the schalke seems has people reacting to it other than perceived outrages alleged by the saudi government. >> if you look at other countries and places committed -- who have committed terrible atrocities and have done things that are awful. the largest the sea intelligence agencies funds companies all over the valley. no one is turning way that. if the cia is assassinating journalists and other countries, they might be. the reality is, the u.s. government has been killing people all over the world for decades but we do not turned on

their money. the chinese have not necessarily been the best actors yet their money is coming in droves into silicon valley. i think we will get to a point soon where saudi money becomes less of a bad thing. brad: how do you feel about that? if you are an employee at uber and you have an ipo next year yet it has taken billions of dollars of saudi money. our employees and come to bull? selina: i think public outrage is at an all-time high. tech employees in the community really care about who is backing their companies, where is this money coming from. we saw google had to not renew a contract with the defense department and they have come under backlash from the government and their own employees to create a center dot rhythm. while it is correct that this is not the first time a regime doing terrible acts funded tech companies, i think we are in a unique time. brad: we should clarify. we do not know that the cia is assassinating journalists, but your point is right.

it reminds me of the universities in the early 90's where people were asking schools to invest -- to not invest in south africa. protect employees make their voices heard in ways people were not expecting? lane: we should erase the fact that any journalist has been assassinated because of their reporting, -- companies alter of the middle east have been involved in silicon valley for more than a decade. if you go to a venture capital training program at stanford, a third of the classes saudis. the saudi royal family has been investing in capital funds for a decade. it is not like money we decide to not take from the severn well fund is different than the fruit of the poisonous tree from another vc fund. i do not know you can really

separate that web anymore than turning done money from a source. brad: any idea if the saudi royal family will be forced to make a change in leadership and respond to concerns? lane: that is the big question everyone is asking. brad: so slightly different conflict. the uber ipo is rumored for early next year. there has been news that morgan stanley and goldman sachs is competing for that ipo. your former colleagues at uber, how excited are they were dependent on they on this happening sooner than later? lane: a year ago, most uber employees were chatting a lot about an ipo, when was it going to happen, what was the number, but then there were two offers. the intensity and need for an ipo to happen, employees are watching and former employees are paying attention to it. sliced smoked tech companies, there is a six-month lockout for

most employees. if you look at facebook as a barometer, a year after it ipo did, it was half the value that it ipo debt. everybody wants to get to the next stage. brad: thanks to you both. selina wang and lane castleman -- kasselman. coming up, a cloud software is's biggest product, but as the cloud space becomes competitive, with a push and i.t. keep it afloat? "bloomberg technology" is livestreaming on twitter. check us out @technology, and be sure to follow our global news network, @tictoc, on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ brad: competition in the cloud space is heating up as amazon, microsoft, and google muscle in. that makes it tough for smaller players. one has managed to keep up so far. they posted first-quarter earnings that beat estimates reporting 37% year-over-year in quarterly revenue. investors have reacted negatively with shares falling. what are the long-term future for smaller players? here to discuss is jay simmons. talk about that discrepancy. good earnings, yet the share price drops slightly. jay: it's hard to predict what the market will do. we focus on the decade and things we can control like building better software that more and more people want to buy. brad: part of the reaction is debt obligations, right?

how so? jay: it is a charge that we mark to market and the stock has had incredible performance over the last handful of months. we recognize that charge. brad: so a lot of sales going on in your business and you acquire the company that makes it easier for companies to manage i.t. disruptions. talk about that and how the integration is going. jay: we signaled three months ago that we widen the aperture on i.t. in a big problem that i.t. organizations were facing is responding to incidents and dealing with incidences more, and more companies become digital companies. that impact means of most companies are managing a service for their customers or employees. so this is a really important part of rust ring people who will be on duty to respond to the incident.

we also announced jira ops which becomes a command center for all people process workflow helping companies respond faster to their customers. brad: so little bit of an earthquake in your business when microsoft acquired getup -- bighub. jay: github is a great product transforming the way information was shared on the internet. i think that makes it a very attractive asset for a company like microsoft that also has an infrastructure platform. with bit bucket, we are focused on more collaborative code collaboration. brad: we reported that google was interested in buying github. does the fact that it missed out make this more of a compelling opposition to a company like google?

jay: you will have to ask google. i think it is telling you google, amazon, microsoft are a hotly contested and massive market competition for the infrastructure that runs a lot of software that more and more companies build. our focus on helping -- is helping them build and run software faster or better. i think that is a testament to why we have grown to the rate we have. brad: are you guys for sale now for the right price and partner? jay: i don't think so. we have been independently run for a long time and we have a lot of growth in front of us. brad: thank you, jay. atlassian president, jay simmons. coming up, know your rights.

a congressman says know your internet rights. we find out what he has in mind, next. we already have a celebrity presidents, but with three weeks left until midterms, are celebrities the key to online voter registration? this is bloomberg. ♪

brad: this is "bloomberg technology." i'm brad stone in san francisco in for emily chang. have you heard of the internet bill of rights? you might soon, if california congressman ro khanna has anything to say about it. he drafted a 10 point program that will help to figure out what people's rights and responsibilities look like online, telling bloomberg "citizens need to be protected from the operation of corporate actors." he covers california's 17th district, making him the representative for silicon valley. he joins us now from washington. thank you for joining us. you are a silicon valley representative.

you have lots of friends here. tell us what this internet bill of rights, what the reaction has been at home. >> the bill of rights is a simple document to say that people's freedoms and security need to be protected online. it has common sense provisions. individuals should know what is happening to their data, just like you know what is happening to your data, to your financial data on a credit check, you should know what happens to the data you have online. you should be notified if there is a breach, you should be able to consent before your data is collected. it's gotten a good reception. many tech leaders understand that we need well-crafted regulations. brad: the european union has gone a little farther and acted sooner on privacy regulations, and in particular, the right to be forgotten. the right of any citizen to say, take me off your search engine.

is this internet bill of rights doing the same thing? >> no, it's not. first of all, we have the first amendment, so the right to be forgotten would be unconstitutional. if i do not like this interview, i should not be able to say delete it from the internet because it does not make me look good. that's what the right to be forgotten is. it would be unconstitutional. also, europe has consent required in every use case. if you go to a european website, anytime you see an ad you would have to click consent. it means that users are having to click consent 20 times in a day. it is overly broad and overly prescriptive, and europe hasn't rivaled america's innovation. they have a few tech companies that have emerged. they do not have the innovation we do. this is more consistent with our constitution. it's pro-innovation, but it is saying that we do need some

basic protections here in the american context. brad: i was interested by point number six, which is a net neutrality provision saying that users should be free to access the internet without encountering throttling or paid prioritization. the trump fcc has a limited net neutrality provision. with that override the fcc. how does this jibe with what has been resistance from the trump administration? >> you are right. it is a net neutrality provision. the fcc's chair under obama had a net neutrality provision with a fcc that i thought was very strong. the trump's nominee has repealed it. what we want to see is not ping-ponging back and forth on net neutrality from administration to administration. we should have congress pass a statute, a law, that says net neutrality is required. that's what the internet bill of rights would do. if we do take back congress, the

democrats should work with reasonable republicans to get net neutrality in statute. brad: as you said, you consulted with some of these deep thinkers in the tech world. i'm curious, to what extent are you holding tech companies to account? and to extent are you protecting them from what could be more intrusive or restrictive regulation? or is the point to do a little bit of both? >> that is a very fair question. it certainly is holding tech companies to account, because right now they do not have a right to notify in the case of a breach. we saw with the equifax and facebook breaches, people were not notified for months or years. this would require them to be notified right away. right now they do not have to get people's consent to collect data. you have to sign a service agreement but after that, basically they have carte blanche. this would impose a consent requirement.

it would require them to tell you what they are doing with your data. it would really put a fair amount of responsibility on tech companies. that said, it is not overbroad. it is well-crafted. and the danger is if tech does not support well-crafted regulation, you could see more draconian measures that hurt innovation. my hope is that people like tim cook who call for well-crafted regulation will realize they should get on board with reasonable regulation. it does not have to be support for my internet bill of rights, but that's a conversation starting point and, hopefully, they will engage with the congress to get good legislation. brad: that was actually my next question, which is what have you heard from the big tech companies? we've heard tim cook and mark zuckerberg and jeff bezos say that they would welcome regulation, that the tech companies deserve scrutiny. what has been the initial feedback to the bill of rights?

>> the feedback has been positive. but as people say the devil is in the details. we can agree with these high level principles but what is the legislation going to say? how are you going to define what constitutes personal data? what does it mean to say you have to be notified in a reasonable time period, is that 24 hours or a week? what does it mean when you say you need consent before you collect data? how often do you need consent? i think all those questions are going to fall to the energy and commerce committee in the house of representatives. the details of this legislation are really going to matter. and i hope that congress will consult nonprofits, academics, and outside tech leaders because i will tell you the expertise is not in the building. we need to engage with the tech community in crafting regulations that are thoughtful and make sense. brad: congressman, what are the political prospects for the internet bill of rights? does it depend on a particular outcome in the midterms and

perhaps the democrats taking one or both branches of congress? >> i think the prospects are higher if the democrats take over because the republicans have been in charge for two years and there has been no movement. think about that. after the cambridge analytica scandal, and mark zuckerberg and google testified, the republicans have not moved. they are beholden to the internet service providers. and they have not made a good faith effort to propose an internet bill of rights. if the democrats are in charge, we will take reasonable regulatory steps. we are not going to demonize companies the way republicans are. it is absurd to say that facebook and google's algorithms are politically biased. the biggest beneficiary has been donald trump. so, i think some of the republican attacks lack a knowledge of how these algorithms work, but we are going to propose reasonable regulations.

and hopefully, moderate republicans will come on board. brad: let me change the topic and ask you about facebook and the upcoming elections. they recently gave reporters a tour of their war room. they claimed success countering voter suppression and fake news in the brazilian election. is facebook doing enough in your mind? >> they did not do enough in 2016 but i think they are taking constructive steps and they need to do even more. part of me is sympathetic. they started 14 years ago with 20,000 users and now they have grown to 2 billion people. that is a huge platform, bigger than any nation. so, to figure out how do you have controls on this to prevent incitement of violence, voter suppression, human rights abuses is a big project. what i think they need to do is hire many more people who are humanists, ethicists to come up with standards of what requirements there should be for

third party verification for weeding out hate speech or propaganda. i think they need to hire a lot of people to work there. but i'm glad they are taking steps, and it is a start. brad: one more question. i remember you being quite skeptical of amazon's takeover of whole foods, of at&t's acquisition of time warner. that skepticism has risen about the big tech platforms. do you think the rest of congress is coming around to your view of antitrust? >> i think they are. there is a large concern that you cannot have anti-competitive mergers that hurt communities, that hurt local businesses and hurt wages and, at the very least, these mergers need to be scrutinized. i helped found the antitrust caucus. i have been clear it cannot be that big is bad. you need review and you need to look at what the impact is for consumers. what the impact is on jobs and

on wages. what the impact is on communities. we need to empower the department of justice to conduct those reviews and provide resources. i think there is a growing consensus, both on the right and the left, that we need strong antitrust laws that do their job. brad: ok, representative ro khanna of california, thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me back. brad: facebook has hired britain's former deputy prime minister nick clegg. clegg's taking the job at a time when governments are debating how to regulate. clegg was at the heart of the british government from 2010-2015 as leader of the liberal democrats. coming up, call it the taylor swift effect. how celebrity endorsed social media posts impact votes. drive a.i. is launching its second self driving service. could entirely driverless roads be in the near future?

this is bloomberg. ♪

brad: the midterms are three weeks away and, if the past is a predictor of the future, only 40% of voters will vote this election. vote.org is on a mission to change that. in 2018, the organization used data-driven strategies to reach a milestone by registering one million voters. here to discuss is deborah

cleaver, the founder and ceo of vote.org. thanks for joining us. the midterms, 18 days away, how do they look to you? >> that is such an interesting question. i would say we have seen record interest in the midterm elections, especially from people under 30. brad: what are you guys doing this time round? >> this time, ok, so i would say in 2016 we ran a large program. this year, we are reaching 10 times the number of voters both on the website and via proactive outreach and we have also partnered with celebrities, including taylor swift and barack obama to reach even more people. brad: that taylor swift instagram post. i was amazed at the impact that seemed to have. what does that tell us about the current environment that is motivating people to get to the polls? >> it would be hard to overstate the impact of the taylor swift post.

we saw record traffic, we registered 300,000 people, under 30. which is very unusual. brad: on the other end of the spectrum, o magazine tweeted that kanye and kim had broken up and, if you click on the link, it takes you to a voter registration page. effective. what does that tell us about what works and sometimes the overreach? >> i would say it's pretty lighthearted. we have found it honestly to be pretty hilarious. we're calling it vote rolling -- a riff on rick rolling. it has been effective. there was a taylor swift bump and there was an even bigger bump from the vote rolling. it's lighthearted. brad: there was some outrage there. was that misplaced?

>> i would say it was a little bit misplaced. there are other things we should be outraged about. a little bit of fun on the internet is just the internet. brad: what is not working, what is less effective? is it conventional on tv to get people to register? >> broadcast tv has been an effective for quite some time and we have reached a point where 50% of people under 50 have not seen a minute of broadcast tv in a year. if you are running a commercial, you are going to reach anyone under 50. what is working is anything that is not broadcast television including -- brad: their love of states that have instant registration and online registration. not everywhere. how far away are laws that basically facilitate easy registration and voting? >> a handful of states of automatic voter registration which is the gold standard of registration. brad: any time you deal with the state government you are in. >> automatically registered to vote which is a cost savings. why should people have to go out of their way to register to vote when they are dealing with the government? on the other end, 50% of states do not require that your employer give you paid time off

to vote. a number of americans need to choose between voting and collecting a paycheck. brad: ok, the founder and ceo of vote.org. that u.s. has charged a russian national as being one of the master minds behind the russian interference in the 2016 midterm election. the justice department said she was the account for a project latka. the conspirators refer to the effort is "information warfare against the united states." joining us to break down the news is chief washington correspondent kevin cirilli. thank you for joining us. i butchered the suspects name but what can you tell us about

what the government is charging her with? kevin: elena is charged with trying to get and infiltrating the u.s. midterm elections, the upcoming ones in 2018 as well as the previous iteration in 2016. this is big news because this comes just 17 days ahead of the midterm elections. it also comes as the intelligence community has been working with state and local elections commissions and offices nationwide as well as the private sector, and twitter and google, about how to better protect u.s. voters from these actions. it also, of course comes as bob mueller's investigation is also investigating into a host of these issues. this is a separate charge from the department of justice. it is not technically related to the mueller probe. but it really comes at a time in which tech companies are facing questions about how they are communicating and working on cooperating, not just with the federal level but the fbi, folks

at the intelligence community but also the state level. at this shows, the russians are still very much trying to use american platforms to spread propaganda, to spread disinformation, to confuse american voters in this midterm election cycle. brad: kevin, the federal government has charged other russians with election tampering. was this one plot, and what we know about the ties to vladimir putin? kevin: the russian president has denied all of this but facts speak for themselves. the facts are if you look at the intelligence community briefings on reports that have come out with a year or two since the presidential election in 2016, there was concerted effort to use american platforms, american platforms, to spread propaganda and disinformation to divide americans on a host of different issues. so, what this would suggest is that this -- that type of

disinformation strategy. now, this is a potential issue for the administration given that president trump has noted several times, and i want to note that our bloomberg report as well, that this was not an attack on an election system or change the vote count, but it was a broader sense of disinformation that has been used on social media platforms. facebook had also reported that there have been in the less couple of months some effort on foreign nationals to spread disinformation. they have been shutting down accounts and working with federal level, having calls with local election officials. and this is something that i think we'll will be hearing a lot more about between now and the midterm elections. brad: ok, kevin cirilli, chief washington correspondent. thank you. coming up, self driving cars are hitting the roads of texas. how long till they reach the rest of the u.s.?

next. this is bloomberg. ♪

brad: while companies like uber and waymo race to get their self driving programs off the road, california's drive a.i. is launching a ride-hailing self driving car service in arlington, texas. the service which will be open to visitors and residents alike and comes with a partnership with the city to better measure the self driving car landscape. here to tell us more is the ceo. thanks for joining us. arlington, texas. tell us how many cars, high widespread will it be? >> in arlington, we are launching three different services. one for lunchtime services and one that connects the convention center to the entertainment part of the city. to start with today, the launch,

we're starting with three cars. with the potential to expand as the demand grows. they are the same cars we had in frisco. in the dallas-fort worth area. brad: three cars, that does not seem huge, but it is a beginning. >> the size is only one way of looking at it. safety is the concern. and user acceptability. we start small and grow fast. brad: how much do riders pay? >> riders pay nothing. anybody can access this service. in arlington we have a mobile app and a kiosk, a pickup location. you can enter your name and your phone number. brad: how long is the path between three cars car and the dream of anyone in any city hailing a driverless car? >> it depends on three factors

because --safety is one thing. can we safely deployed? the second factor, driving is not just one problem. we want to make sure we take a small problem and grow from there. it will require a third component, regulatory and user acceptance. we don't want to push the technology when people are not ready. brad: so, you have found a friendly local government in texas. what stepping back, how do you compare the regulatory environment in the u.s. versus say china where there are several companies that have active trials. >> yes. some countries are way ahead of other countries but the real problem is the safety. usually the regulation is not there. as an industry, we have to be responsible to deliver how we -- and deliver it and how we approach it. there are certain approaches -- ride regulation is the right way to approach it. texas is -- we are only saying

that they are future looking. how do we balance future need and progress? brad: ok, we are both followers of uber, one of the companies betting big on self driving cars. you think is a move to go public will they welcome other investments in their self driving car division? >> as you said, i always look at the industry and other people. i cannot, not anything specific to a company because i do not have that information. you might. brad: i understand. thank you for joining us. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology." tune in for the best of bloomberg technology this weekend we can see our interview with the microsoft ceo. i'm brad stone. this is bloomberg. ♪

the following is a paid program for dermaflash, sponsored by dermaflash. do you know the skin you want is lying just below the skin you see? you can remove your old dead skin and even peach fuzz, and reveal your best skin. smooth, radiant, younger looking skin with dermaflash. what is dermaflash? this is the one beauty product y