150 dollars off and free shipping too. sale prices are available right now. go to buyleesa.com today. you need emily: i'm emily chang in san francisco. this is "bloomberg technology." another high departure from facebook. what does this mean for zuckerberg's control of the company? saudi arabia's investment loses more top speakers. and netflix's spending spree continues. the streaming giant turns to

junk bonds to fuel its cost. how investors are handling the new $2 billion in debrt. -- debt. is leavingcofounder facebook. he is the latest in a string of high-profile departures from facebook this year, including instagram's founders and aatsapp founder -- and whatsapp founder. joining me, david kirkpatrick and sarah frier. iribe'swe know about reasons for leaving and do they differ from that of the other founders? sarah: you're seeing a trend right now. all these companies were convinced to join facebook in part because facebook said they could remain a little bit independent, sort of like the same independent company they always were, but within

facebook, with all these resources to grow faster. it looks like that kind of promise is eroding a bit. iribe said he needs time off because he has been in the game for 30 -- 20 years and he needs a break. whether that's the real reason, i'm sure we will find out soon. it's part of this larger trend of facebook taking a little more control over the future of facebook, which is, as we have spoken about on the show, the future of facebook will be more diversified than facebook itself and the newsfeed. it will be dependent on these other properties to bring money in that is more diversified and certainly v.r. is one of the longest-term bets. emily: iribe's departure is certainly not surprising. you have reported on tension between the oculus founders and facebook that goes way back, but him leaving in the context of all of these other founders leaving, david, sarah and i heard kevin speak at the wired conference last week, and he was

very diplomatic. he didn't sell mark zuckerberg down the river. but the way these departures have happened does not looking good -- look good. how bad is this for facebook? david: there's no question it does not look good. all these people got a gigantic payday quite some time ago. company thatn a they have to justify to all their friends why they are staying with. that's the reality of working at facebook today. facebook is increasingly perceived as a negative in society among the sort of sophisticated circles that these kind of people circulate in. also if you don't have much power to do anything about the significant central problems of , you might just feel like you don't have the power to do anything about it.

-- you mightrg feel mark zuckerberg doesn't listen to you. of course they are tired. emily: is that the case, though, sarah? we had that rebuttal from mark goeswhich said to extraordinary lengths to protect founders. what are you hearing? sarah: he does protect founders as long as they are performing to his expectations. in the case of oculus, facebook was a little disappointed about how fast it was moving a couple years ago. jobe stepped down from his to leave room for another executive to take over the whole v.r. initiative. he has been driving that in a couple years that he has been in charge. they have released a few new devices that bring v.r. into a more mass-market realm. there is the oculus quest, the cheaper one that came out earlier this year that people could buy for their homes.

this is something that, the part of it that brendan was working on, the high quality pc-tethered oculus will be a little more of a narrow market, if you think about zuckerberg's vision of eventually getting one billion people using virtual reality. emily: you just published a post where the first line is, "never before has one company's failure had such a devastating impact on the world." that is a devastating opening line, if you will. this is a company that is now working on its election response in multiple countries, not with just the u.s. midterms coming up, but also elections happening in brazil. what do you mean by that? david: it's not the only very strongly negative line in that story, sadly, which is called "facing facebook's failure." wholt forced, as someone has been covering this company closely for 12 years -- i wrote a book called "the facebook effect," which was a

generally positive portrayal. i still believe the company has positive potential and does a lot of good in the world, but it is doing some enormously negative things in the world that i don't think the company is a technology or fully -- is acknowledging or fully reckoning with and to some extent has sought to cover up. the story documents specific cases where they have dissembled, where they have refused to react after being presented with unequivocal evidence, particularly in cases like genocide in sri lanka and myanmar. all kinds of hate speech incidents that they have done a very poor job responding to. they've never taken a systemic look at their system and asked why is this happening. my fundamental critique in the article is that they prioritize growth over governance. we now have a global system which empowers anyone, including the mostevil -- including the most evil, dishonest people, and does not

have governance or real tools to allow the malfeasance that takes place on this system to be regulated and contained. and that is causing enormous difficulty in the world. emily: walk us through what's happening in brazil right now, days away from a presidential runoff election, where whatsapp has been overrun by fake news and conspiracy theories and you have a candidate who didn't have a lot of public campaign funding manage to somehow run an incredibly successful campaign, exploding session medial -- social media. facebook would like you to think just of the good the platform has allowed to proliferate, but there is the same use for the kind of activity that has gone on on whatsapp. facebook was able to take down a lot of spam accounts on friday, and that was their response to the fact that there was this proliferation of misinformation

that, in some cases, led to violence around brazil's first vote. there will be a follow-up vote on october 28. this is messedy -- messy, as many of facebook's problems are. it's not just random backpackers in the community -- bad actors in the community. it's people from within the campaign. his son was kicked off of whatsapp and later restored. that at is dealing with the same time it is strong to roll out this war room, where it is trying to convince the public it will be prepared for not just the brazil runoff election, but the u.s. midterms, coming up very soon. and the problem in brazil in particular is that whatsapp is an encrypted app. the messages people send to each other, facebook cannot really see. they are using their machine learning to try to figure out where the spam is coming from.

all they can do is get rid of the account. they can't necessarily track what's being sent to whom or how often it is being sent. that is a very hard problem to solve. emily: david, sarah and i both went into this election interference war room that facebook has now set up, where they had teams of people from different teams across the country, company who can make quick decisions if something happens. you are tracking the elections in brazil and the united states -- they are tracking the elections in brazil and the united states. the point has been made that facebook can't do everything. it's up to users to decide if they see a post, whether it looks false or not. is it too much to expect facebook to be able to do what it -- what we are expecting facebook to do? david: no intelligent observer could expect them to keep all unpleasant and unproductive messages off of their system. what we need is far better means to address the problems when they are identified.

i think the war room is a great idea. it should have been begun probably four years ago. you look at a situation like what happened in brazil with the son getting kicked off with that myanmarwhatsapp or in where the general who runs the country got kicked off facebook, only after he was recommended to be prosecuted by the international criminal court. they had plenty of information, if they chose to look at it, to know that the generals who run myanmar were encouraging genocide against the rohingya muslim minority. this is in 130 languages in 190 countries, and the gold a had was to get there -- the goal they had was to get there. now they are there. they don't know what to do to prevent it from having dramatically negative clinical consequences. there are certain kinds of politicians popping up in turkey, in hungary, in myanmar, in plenty of places, brazil, italy, where they don't really

want to follow the rules. they want power at all costs. they will do whatever they have to do. facebook is a system that is easy to cheat inside. facebook does not have the tools yet to prevent that cheating. it is something we at techonomy have made such a priority. we have a session at our conference coming up with two of the sources of our story, including one who tells the most shocking story in that article i published today. it is shocking how much facebook has allowed to happen. it is unacceptable. they cannot solve everything. they can't be perfect, but it is disastrous. emily: sarah, the other thing that's fascinating is simply the size of whatsapp in brazil. it rivals the size of facebook. does that happen anywhere else? sarah: it's very common in countries outside the u.s. for whatsapp to be so much more popular than facebook. that's one of the problems here. when facebook comes out and says, we are going to solve those problems, we are

administering our machine learning algorithms, we are checking what's trending, figuring out who is saying what, figuring out if there are fake accounts -- that stuff doesn't necessarily apply to the main tools people are using in many of these countries. emily: bloomberg tech's sarah frier and david kirkpatrick, lots to debate and discuss days away before the elections in brazil and the united states. coming up, tech stocks attempting to bounce back after a miserable few weeks. could earnings from amazon, alphabet, and microsoft this week give them a boost? we will discuss. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: with tech stocks

suffering their worst month relative to the broader market in more than a year, gordon -- goldman sachs has some advice for bears. make sure you are selling for the right reason. outperforming has turned into concerns valuation -- of overvaluation. equities aren't counting to bounce back after a miserable equities are attempting to bounce back after a miserable few weeks. earnings may provide a welcome stimulus in the coming days. ining us, thereupon sack -- michael and sarah. is the selloff overblown? >> i think so. if you look at the ratios, you see these periods where it really is underperforming. we have a broader discussion layered on top of that. the spike telling us on

the broader macro theme here? what i think has been happening is the buy side has been playing it safe since q2, particularly with the stuff that has run a lot. but that safety also helps higherfurther, you know, probability of a rally coming out of earnings. obviously, earnings do have to perform. from a top-down perspective i don't, se many reasons -- i don't see many reasons they should not be reasonably strong. of all the sectors we talk about in this late cycle discussion, if you think about unemployment pressures, sure, amazon just raised its minimum wage, but for -captech medic -- mega companies, they are largely less than -- vulnerable to these pressures. costs are not really part of that discussion that the fed and others are still focused

on. it's a different discussion, and i think that's another reason why they will get bid here if we do have good earnings. emily: what's an underlying reason investors are selling? >> there have been a lot of reasons out there that have been blamed for the selloff in tech, whether that's the run-up in rates or that tech companies are more exposed to trade with china, as well as the fact that maybe this was a momentum trade that had to get unwound. we heard that valuations maybe got ahead of himself -- themselves. as david pointed out, if you look at computer and software companies, they have been cheaper than they have been historically. if you look at holdings of mutual funds, they actually right now hold less tech than the average benchmark index. that idea of them being very overcrowded or extremely expensive just might not be the case to certain investors. emily: michael, did this start earlier this year with facebook,

with cambridge analytica, with that big, bad earnings report where they had $20 billion wiped off their market cap? michael: it's interesting you brought that up. i might bereasons more comfortable about being overweight or long on this sector is that since the facebook scandal with cambridge really eupted last -- erupted last spring, what you have seen is a consistent bid for ndx volatility. people have been buying the dip with some insurance or protection, and that should help insulate downside risk if some of these -- whether it's a big earnings miss or maybe the prospect of a tail risk of government intervention starts coming more into the foreground here. i think that latter situation is a little bit more hypothetical than real right now, but it is

obviously something you need to be wary of, particularly given how skewed the sell-side analysts are on the faang stocks and so many of the tech names, where there are a lot of buys, not a lot of sells. emily: facebook had some 20% wiped off its market cap, closer to $100 billion. sarah, is this kind of volatility here to stay, knowing we have earnings coming up this week? sarah: there's no question this week forill be a big the market as a whole and for some of the tech names reporting. i think they are largely rip -- expected to come out strong. if we get any misses or hear management caution, we've seen that any news is bad news almost. if you miss on one number or if the executives do come out talking about price pressures or trade, then that could hit the stock. however, those are not really issues that should be expected with some of these big tech companies.

michael was just discussing the volatility index on the nasdaq 100. it has risen the past three weeks. it came off a bit for the vix last week. we continue to see volatility in these large tech names. emily: michael, what's your advice to investors knowing that netflix reported a strong quarter on the back of a not so strong quarter and that there are a few days left before we have this new information? michael: if you have a generally positive view on risk appetite and the broader equity market, you really need to be long tech and faang and growth stocks. every time we get a 210 curve spike here, you see this narrative about rotation in the value, but i'm not sure you necessarily -- that that argument will hold up this time, when it didn't hold up the last several times that happened. i would stay with what has been working. i think it's going to continue

to work. a lot of these stocks are not burdened by the late cycle opportunities. the volatility adjusted over five years for these stocks has been far superior to what we have seen another equity indices. i don't see reasons why that superiority won't persist for at least the next six months to 12 months. emily: the point has been made that tech is relatively cheaper to what it once was. is that a good benchmark? sarah: i think it depends on what you're looking at. what's interesting is you can find a valuation for almost everything. some people are looking at price to earnings, price-to-book. people will pull on what they feed off of. relatively cheap compared to history, yeah, that would be a good benchmark to go off of, but it depends on how you are actually evaluating the prices of these companies. you also have to take into account their forward growth and forward price. emily: all right.

sarah, michael. we will be across all of these earnings over the next couple of weeks. tiger global has reportedly raised $3.75 billion for its 11th venture capital virm -- fir m. the new fundt specialize in technology with investments in consumer internet, cloud software, and direct consumer firms in the u.s., india, and china. sources say the fundraising exceeded the firm's target, bringing total assets under management to more than $15 billion. coming up, the hyperloop may become reality sooner than you think. where and when it will become test -- begin testing. check us out on twitter, @technology. this is bloomberg. ♪

emily: more upheaval at cbs. another resignation less than a month after being named interim chair. he was one of six new appointees after the departure of les moonves. he said he is leaving because of competitions from blood cancer. one of the new board of counties -- board appointees was named the new interim chair. he is the ceo of take two interactive, publisher of popular video games like "grand theft auto." shares have fallen the most in a dutch health care company, posting profits that missed estimates. it says it wants to redefine its manufacturing output -- redesign its manufacturing output due to trade tensions. >> we are in the good position to have factories in the united states, in europe, and in asia, and we can rebalance load going

forward in order to avoid some of the duty impact. besides that, i think we will have to look at raising prices selectively as well as taking productivity measures to offset, for example, these currency headwinds. emily: elon musk has taken a step forward in his vision for the future of public transportation. he announced the hyperloop test tunnel will open in less than two months. the tunnel begins on the side of msu -- site of musk's rocket company in california. to saudi, saying no arabia. another big name leaves their investment conference. now the coo of softbank is walking away. plus, netflix just took on more debt to fund its appetite for new content. should investors be concerned? this is bloomberg. ♪ this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ emily: this is "bloomberg inhnology." i am emily chang san francisco. time, softbank ceo has dropped out of the saudi arabian conference. that withdrawal comes in the wake of saudi arabia admitting that journalist jamal khashoggi was killed in the embassy from an alleged fistfight. the two new ceos jumping out are now part of a list of no-shows that includes richard branson, jamie dimon, steve mnuchin and more. that prompted a rare on camera response from a member

who had a personal relationship with the crown prince, mohammad bin salman. take a look at what he told cnn. >> to be fallujah's parent, the world is watching. this is a very serious accusation. and a serious situation. to make sure you are transparent, and to take this very seriously. emily: to join best to discuss, we are joined by the merck executive editor for the middle east and africa, riad hamade. studio, we also have bloomberg tech's selina wang, who covers softbank. open,kushner left door because you said that they were still working to cover the best together the front from a lot of places. can you talk to us about the couple of ceos refusing to ofend, but in the context the new information we are double about a body being sent in, and more signs of alleged premeditated murder.

leaks coming out, they have been this sort of the drip, drip of leaks been provided by the turks to various media outlets and i think every time the saudis come up with an explanation or a version of events, the turks seem to be leaking yet more information, to raise it out and put pressure on saudi arabia. that is basically making it very hard for senior officials of companies, senior ceos, to agree to be at the conference because they feel that right now, it may taint or raise questions against them about their relationship with the leadership of saudi arabia. people, reallyng come out the last moment, as the conference is about to start, dropping out. emily: selina, we don't know yet

if masayoshi son himself will attend the conference, but the chief operating office. going is sign.ing >> it is interesting, he has not made a public statement about whether or not he is attending. this is starting any minute now, and he is probably preparing us to attend. i have heard from. sources that the portfolio company is still slated to us weekend are still on the edge of their chairs about whether or not they will go. it is interesting that marcello again, not to go, but in a precarious position now, in a close personal relationship to the crown prince. the crown prince has personally committed $45 billion to the fund and another few billion dollars to the next one, so he probably wants to maintain that , even though it is looking increasingly bleak and

horrifying. emily:iad, you have seen an entire revolution here. a point has been made about the discussion about doing business with the saudis, and is ethics commission have been done long ago, and there are so many tied up with business relationships with the saudi government. do you believe these relationships are at risk of completely unraveling at this point, or can they be saved? riad: i think it is hard to see them completely unraveling, because the investment linkages as you said, are really significant. when you think of softbank alone, we're talking about $45 billion committed and another 45 billion dollars promised, plus the agreement for the parts that thesigned personally by ceo, masayoshi son. when you think about it infrastructure fund that the

saudis have invested in the u.s. , looking at all the big wall street players, having great commitment and having placed a -- really invested in saudi arabia and trying to work with saudi arabia. seeing that unravel completely is hard to imagine, however, i think what you will see is a willingness of fresh money coming in. the risk premium, at least, after the saudis may rise. emily: i wonder if we know what happens to that. fors really difficult softbank to find an investor who is willing to commit as much money as the saudi's committed, not just to his vision fund, but others. i wonder if companies like. qualcomm have also invested in the vision fund and if they don't reject that monica m this, ify don't reject

they will find other investors willing to come on board? selena: we had a recent interview with the crown prince by bloomberg news and he said, "we are the creators of the softbank vision fund. without the p&f, there will be no softbank vision fund." so clearly, are critically important for the vision found to exist. furthermore, messiah she son may reputation tainted in silicon valley if it continues to take money from the saudi government. this dustey has silicon valley money they may be hard for the entrepreneurs to swallow the fact that this is where the limited partners for the fund are coming from. emily: what is your take from the comments from jared kushner, the first time he has done an interview since president trump took office, and at this particular time, given what we have also heard from the

president himself, it is sending mixed signals. if shows theink public at a position that the trump administration finds itself. jerod kushner is basically taking a saudi arabian line on this, which is, let us wait and see what the investigation shows. rush oning not to judgment here. but the same time, he is telling the saudis, please take this seriously. my sense is that they are taking this quite seriously, you can see that by the fact that they removed senior officials from their positions, basically getting them to take the blame for all of this. here is thekey role that the crown prince played or did not play, the saudis existing that he did not know what happened or was not told what happened. i think the trump administration

would like that to be the case but they're asking the saudis to -- releaseand relief of information have about this. emily: won't that become a more difficult to defend, given the leaks coming from the turkish government? it seems like there is new information and new evidence that is coming to light undermining what they have said. indeed. just to say, a lot of things coming from the turkish side are officialaks, not from statements by turkish police. we may hear more that is official from the president tomorrow, the starting day of the conference, so we may know for many, what the turks actually have, we don't know. what the turks are doing, sometimes the release pictures, they say they have tapes, we are

not sure whether they do, whether it is audio or video, there is uncertainty about exactly what it is that they have officially. i think that is causing that the unease in people deciding what do.o or what not to it seems like most executives, top executives have decided that it is just not worth the risk for reputational damage, but the conference will have a lot of sort of mid-level managers coming from these banks, so i think there is merely a sense of not wanting to cut off ties completely. emily: what is the reaction among the saudi population on the ground there, given -- obviously, these huge diplomatic relationships at stake, but also this investment conference that was about to be -- was supposed to be about the future of this country, being compromised? riad: first of all, it is hard

to generalize, there are of course, no opinion polls, but from people and reporters are have talked to, there was shock. shock when the government finally admitted that there journalists had been killed, the foreign minister even called it murder. officials i have spoken with say yes, something went wrong, and i think the admission of that after 10 days of denial that jamal khashoggi had been killed, saying that he had been left -- saying that he had left, which the crown prince told us in a interview, i think there is a sense of shock and great discomfort at this. people feel like this does not represent our country, not something that should have had and in their name, as it were. at the same time, there is a sense that the country is very much under attack.

emily: fascinating. i know you will keep us posted as events unfold, number riad hamade, bloomberg editor for africa.ast and meanwhile, the website of the saudi investment conference appears to have been hacked before crushing. the homepage displays an error message on monday after screen grabs taken from the same web address appeared on social media, depicting the crown standing over slain journalist, jamal khashoggi, with a flaming sword. there was also an and fraud islamic state -- islamic state flag unfurled in the background. coming up, can netflix handle new does? we will have more, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ family: netflix's appetite for new content is not cheap, they plan to raise $2 billion by financing debt securities. this is a week after our third-quarter earnings report where it announced over a billion dollars in long-term debt. can netflix handle the risk? lucas shaw is here to discuss with us. can they handle it? >> as long as they keep growing, they can. they seem to borrow money every six to 12 months now because of how much they are investing in the original programming, which

then attracts customers, boosts subscriber totals and mix wall theyt happy, which is how raise money. emily: how do they do that? is it because of how much they spend? >> netflix has managed to account in a way that makes it seem that they are spending less money than they are. on a balance sheet statement, they will say they spent about $7 billion so far this year and they will spend even more by the end. on a cash basis, there are spending a few billion dollars more than that, which is how the -- which is why they need to keep raising money. they can amortize over time and prefer it in a couple of years. emily: that said, sales are still growing 30 or so percent per year. do they need to do this or is it just a strategy. reporter: i think they need to

do it if they want to keep increasing. their whole strategy is to keep increasing and grab a larger share of the amount of time people spend watching videos. hour aare spending one day watching netflix, they want to make it two and the way to do this is to give you something you haven't seen before, give you something new. they are doing it for an increasingly global audience. if you notice, some of the bonds to they were in euros, probably because of the growing share of their audiences from europe. emily: should investors be nervous about the rest of all of this debt? lucas: if you are nervous about them raising more money and you are nervous about the netflix model at all -- there are still investors who say that this is sustainable. that an email ring master netflix is still not a brand excited thate so

this company is still brand-new, secure.model is not but it is had to imagine netflix going anywhere at this point, they are growing at such a rate, the question is can they keep it going? if it comes out a reevaluation question, are they a bit overvalued, probably. is this a company disappearing anytime soon, not at all. emily: what about competitors, are they burning through cash at the same rate? lucas: no. most of the big media companies, some of them have plenty of leverage, like cbs, was a lot of thesebut most of companies are very profitable and they do not need to raise money, also they are not increasing their content spend the same way netflix is. companies like apple and amazon, applethey are, but again, is sitting on so much cash that it is not a concern for them. seem for amazon, they are companies with much more robust business is an entertainment is

basically a marketing spend. emily: thank you so much, lucas shaw come up for keeping us updated. meantime, billionaire richard ranson stepped down as chairman of virgin hyperloop, the company that planned on building a supersonic transport system. he said that company is a more hands-on chairman. last week, the financial times reported that saudi arabia pulled on a planned deal with the company after richard branson halted investment talks in the wake of the disappearance of journalist, jamal khashoggi. who wins the global ai race? china, the united days? our next guest ways in. this is bloomberg. ♪ in.ur next guest weighs ♪

emily: in a race to be the global leader in artificial intelligence, china wants to be

first lace and it is making its presence known in the startup world. beijing is funding 48% of global startups in that space, the u.s. 31%.cond with 10 a is also planning to invest at least $7 billion in ai by 2030. so which country will win? , whot down with kai-fu lee authored a new book on the superpowers: china, silicon valley and the new world ordered to find that out as well as what people are missing in the conversation about ai. >> i think people have a mistaken assumption that ai is about human intelligence and in the book, i tried to come dust to clarify that it is a simple and effective way in one domain to do something, and secondly, china is good at implementing ai, while u.s. is good and researcher technology.

and thirdly, ai will make a huge impact on the world, including creating a lot of value, wealth, implementable in every domain, but also causing challenges such as displacement of jobs. emily: we talk a lot about china versus the u.s. in ai. our parts of it is zero-sum game, or all of it? kai-fu: et al. think it is a zero-sum game at all, chinese vc's are investing in chinese companies to make products for chinese customers and american is invest in american companies to develop products for world customers. that gain of any chinese company in ai does not come at the expense of the american company. it is like two parallel universes running. i think we ought to work together in this climate, if it would allow it. emily: should the u.s. be worried about china surpassing this country in ai, and vice versa? kai-fu: in research, china will

not stop us u.s. for another 20 years, with or without any regulation. the u.s. is just so far ahead in research. however, in implementation commission has everything they need. there is nothing the u.s. can do to slow down china, so it is pointless in ai to look at how the regulator best to look at -- to look at the regulators. emily: what are the consequences, especially given the choices that the white house has made, in taking on china? kai-fu: well, i think that traded disputes include a lot of issues outside ai, but i don't see a lot of in-depth aserstanding on the ai issue i saw in the obama administration. the ai workpapers were very thoughtful, well written and inclusive a lot of experts. i don't see that in the current

administration. is quite willing to work with the u.s.. --a theoretical theoretically if we could invest in a company that has the u.s. research and technology and chinese data and market access, that would be the fastest-growing. i think if the current policies make that possible, i think was countries will have lost. emily: if it is not a zero sum game, should the u.s. not be worried about china stealing its ip, because that is in part the u.s.'s concern? kai-fu: it is a universal concern. including the chinese, now see the errors are some companies and i think any agreement protecting i will be welcomed by china -- protecting ip will be welcomed by china. to include everything into the

trade deficits in the, is too much. emily: do you believe ai will share our values? kai-fu: i think at this point ai is just our tool, we program it and treat it with data, we tell it what to optimize. there is no independent thinking by ai to not share our values. that fori acknowledge example, when facebook programmed their ai to get us to read the news feed more often, it had certain side effects. i think the side effects can be studied and controlled. some of the more extreme views that ai will reach singularity and be smarter than people. emily: you don't think that ai will become superhuman? kai-fu: no, i don't think it will happen, not in the 25th and 30 years. emily: what if somebody programs it to have that capability? kai-fu: it is still missing

breakthroughs. if you look at the last 62 years of history in artificial intelligence, the has only been breakthrough. we need at least 20 more breakthroughs and when we start seeing five or eight breakthroughs, we can revisit the question. but nobody knows at all, how to build a. i think many of the remarks about exaggerated ai impact into the world are made by non-ai people, which is why ai people need to stand up and say, before you make those projections about dystopia, let us see some progress. emily: so elon musk is wrong? kai-fu: he is. emily: our conversation with a fully. that does it for this edition of. here go g technology from san francisco, i am emily chang. this is bloomberg. ♪ g. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ haidi biz welcome to "daybreak: australia, i am haidi stroud-watts in sydney. rishaad: we are coming to the first open. ♪ haidi: here are the stories were covering in the next hour, stocks in the u.s. fell ahead of the week in earnings. the dollar strengthened the highest in two months. the united kingdom has blown its plans on brexit and skeptical lawmakers are turning to bring down