♪ >> this is "bloomberg technology." ceo and alphabet and googles chief financial officer joined the bloomberg global business forum in new york wednesday. and crowd strike found itself in the middle of the trump-ukraine

scandal. we will have an exclusive interview with the ceo. and ebay's ceo steps down from his role after turmoil at the global market site. who next will help invigorate the flattering company? first, to our top story. continued regulation in the u.s. and across the globe was the hot topic at the global business forum in york, where the question being asked was, will regulations stifle innovation? erik schatzker sat down with the ceo of google and alphabet. >> there are areas where we are already leaning into regulation. google's privacy has been sacrosanct. it is your data. early on, we invested in things like privacy control so that it is easy for you to find your data. 20 million people go to our privacy controls every day, and

we keep trying to improve them. 20 million people go every day. of relationship you want to have? if you were trying to figure out the fastest way to get here and you google, how do i get to the helpfulick the, it is to have that anchor in your location. for if you are coming to new york for this event, you will be hit with what events are going on, is your flight going to be on time? the ability tove have the choice. if users want to leave, they leave with their data. we have done a lot of work on privacy and data. how does that relate to your question? there is still a yearning for more. we are working with congress. we are clear that we support national privacy legislation.

the devil is in the details. therefore, i think it is incumbent on each of us to provide insight into the areas where there would be unintended consequences from regulation. privacy is one example. the question is often asked of tech, are you paying your fair share in tax? we have paid the average for the last decade, but that narrative still exists, and one of the key issues is that the international tax structure is outdated. given a proposal which is gathering more support for fundamental redo of the international tax system. .e clearly support that the devil is in the details, but we feel like it is progressing. if you want to be a constructive part of the solution, you have an obligation to bring whatever insight or expertise you have so we end up with smart regulations. >> i do think that one of the dangers of the regulatory regime and the direction we are going

in right now, i very much agree with this direction -- regulation and innovation are not friends. listen, we are big companies, and we will have a dialogue and abide by the regulation on a global basis, and when the rules are clear, we will follow those rules. absolutely. but i do think the startups of the world, the businesses that are building the exciting new ideas, et cetera, whatever regulation there is, we would want there to be room for innovation at a certain level, at a much lower scale so you can have startups who have some sandbox to innovate in, to take some risks in, at a size where they will not have a fundamental change on society, and once they get to a certain size, they've got to regulate just like everyone else. the dialogue, i think, is a

positive dialogue. we are going to do the right thing, but to create a sandbox for innovation that 10 years ago created uber and 20 years ago , that'sgoogle incredible. >> do either of you think the sandbox is getting too small? kit is think some of problematic for startups. about fiveo think different things versus just creating a great product that consumers love, et cetera. >> anything you would point to specifically, when you look at europe and some of the regulations there -- anything you would point to specifically? dara: when you look at europe and some of the regulations, there is a startup scene there, and they have one to worry about. -- one more thing to worry

about. as we look forward, i that we should look to create a sandbox for smaller players. >> do you see places where regulation is stifling innovation rates? >> i think there is a risk of it. one of the most staggering applications is ai learning. it is already in so many elements of our life that we take for granted, like voice search and image search and translate. it can be helpful in so many areas, like disease detection. it is an extraordinary asset for us as a country and a society, someone of the key questions is, how do we ensure, in particular that we are managing it properly? our approach is very similar to what has been done without his -- what has been done throughout history, to try to put out a set of symbols and ask for others to build on it. that was done with ivf and pcb. this notion of industry standards and build we think is

a constructive and nimble way to continue to make advancements. one of the questions is, where does this go? do risk for the u.s. is, how we make sure we continue to support innovation and not slow down what we are able to do relative to others? that was dara cosmo sharkey and google's chief financial officer. to discuss this further, we are joined by gary in new york. give me your reaction. i guess we should not be surprised at uber's ceo wants more regulation, but is there concern that all this antitrust scrutiny and extra regulation is stifling innovation russian mark >> -- stifling innovation? >> yes, i think what dara said is what you hear here and there.

that is very much uber's line. what he said is that the younger companies, startups, are having trouble dealing with those things. when he was talking about europe, he was speaking about , making sureations all companies get consent for collecting user data. this idea that we have these big tech companies that are now able to sort of deal with regulation because they have armies of lawyers, they can hire people to sort of deal with the problems that regulation might -- or the costs that regulation might give them. smaller companies can't always do that. this is an argument you also hear from smaller companies, because sometimes the bigger companies want regulation to entrench their position and make it harder for smaller competitors to come up against them. it is a conversation that has been going on and uber has a opined on it.

>> at the time the bloomberg ceo was talking, bank of america came out with sentiments being at a low point. do you get that sense as well? in california, i think ab 5, the law that says if an employee is part of a company's core purpose, they need to be classified as an employee and not an independent contractor. not thinks drivers should necessarily be classified as employees for them, and they are going to fight this in court, but he did say they were kind of coming to this. i am not sure that they were fighting about this very strongly for a long time. we will see how it goes. me.hank you for joining --ther bump in the rpo

bump in the road for wework. it will likely postpone its ipo for next year. steppingows the ceo down, taking a role as a nonexecutive chairman. wework ahead of initially sought to go public next month. coming up, sticking with ceo resignations, we discussed news of ebay. ♪

ebay is stepping down amid the company's ongoing operating review. david wenig has been under pressure from activist paul singer, pressuring the company

to spin off some of its business including stubhub. ebay's chief financial officer has been appointed as the interim ceo. joining me to discuss, spencer soper, who covers the company. spencer, how much of this is stepping down is due to the financials of the company? partly performance and also holding the company together, not selling pieces that activist investors want sold. this is bringing ebay a step closer to the scrapheap. like ebay feels breakup part two. there was a similar situation ebay faced when carl icahn was pressuring steve donahoe to break up ebay and paypal. now we have further pressure, but this time we don't have a promising up and coming company that they want to spin off like they did with paypal. it was just to break up what leftover.

taylor: what are the activists pushing for in terms of breaking up the company? how did they think they can unlock value? spencer: there has been pressure to sell stubhub and the classifieds business, like a local marketplace similar to craigslist. they want to further break up the pieces. winick has been resisted to that. stubhub is thinking, well, we sell sports memorabilia and band memorabilia. if somebody is selling a ticket on ebay, maybe they will spill over and by the t-shirt. but those synergies never materialized. it has been the same story for ebay since the paypal split. there has not been much growth. amazon is leaving it further and further in the test -- in the dust. taylor: what can the interim ceo do that the previous ceo was not able to do?

spencer: it is hard to find a better champion for ebay than david wenig. he was enthusiastic and took efforts to try to really rebrand it and kind of shed its image of being this online garage sale and reestablish it as a place to go to buy new things. it seems like a inertia has kind of set in. placeholder until they find someone else. when they pick a new ceo for a company, does it look like they are picking a new financial architect to further break it up, or are they looking for someone to re-energize ebay, which was we make -- wenig's plan that never went anywhere? taylor: how do they compete with amazon? spencer: not that greatly. wenig would even choke at their conferences, we are not the place to go if you want a roll of paper towels in an hour.

ebay is more of a place for enthusiasts, like if you are a car above, you will go to ebay to find a hard-to-find car parts, or if you are into video games and accessories, you might go there to find difficult-to-find items. i tried to differentiate themselves that way. days or a weekke to get things delivered sometimes, and those are difficult hurdles for shoppers to get over. if you are used to getting something in two days or less, and you get on ebay at have to get it in a week, that's a long time. taylor: that is bloombergs spencer soper. thank you for joining me. theange at juul labs as e-cigarette company faces growing backlash against vaping. chief executive officer kevin burns will be stepping down. a former all tria executive will be taking over. they also said today that they

were ending merger talks with phillip morris. to discuss, i am joined by bloombergs leanna baker. i have to talk about the ceo stepping down. is this all about the investigations into the safety of taping? -- vaping? >> this seems to be the week of ceo's stepping down. but juul had a lot of regulatory hurdles that some investors in ria,company, like alt thought the previous ceo did not handle properly. this is quite a fall from grace. the company has been valued at almost $40 billion when altria invested. where is the value now when states are cracking down and whole countries, like india, are banning these products? taylor: and you have a former altria ceo taking over. what can he do with juul? >> he is viewed as a safe hand

to oversee juul's transformation. for manyen at altria years and helped oversee some of for thelatory approvals product phillip morris is rolling out in the u.s. through altria, considered a safer product. he has the strength in washington to deal with these regulatory issues, but it remains to be seen with changes he could make quickly, because things are getting worse. uplor: i am glad you brought phillip morris, because they announced they were ending the relationship with altria. am i correct in saying the merger is off and the ceo is stepping down, that i am tying those together? >> it is no coincidence, and the sources i spoke to today would agree that while these are companies that are maybe destined to be together, now is not the time because of all

these negative headlines and regulatory headwinds around bang bang -- around jewel -- around juul. when altria invested, they did not think it would it so bad. a is not a time to announce $200 billion merger with so much uncertainty. taylor: philip morrison announced today they will work on getting there product in the u.s. is there any sense of extra competition that creates for juul? >> it has been around for a while in development and was supposed to be the hot new thing until vaping came around with juul. these companies seem excited to roll it out. atlanta, they are testing at their. it there. but i have not spoken with anyone who has used it, and i am

curious what people will be smoking exactly, because it is .eating the tobacco we will see how audiences and customers react to it. taylor: thank you for joining me. online dating service matched using "romance scammers" as a way to fatten its bottom line? ♪

after: match group fell they were accused of tricking consumers into paying for subscriptions. according to the f.t.c., match.com exploited messages from fraudulent accounting to induce non-subscribers to sign up for subscriptions. to discuss, i am joined by bloombergs david mclaughlin. what is the f.t.c. arguing here?

>> so this case comes down to how match treated subscribers to its dating site, match.com and non-subscribers. what the f.t.c. says is that for non-subscribers who got messages or likes from people on the site, it was very often the case that those messages were coming from scammers and basically fake accounts on the site. and when these messages were sent, match would advertise to the users, you should sign up for a paid subscription to see this message and see this person. but those were fake accounts, and so the f.t.c. says this was a way to get subscribers up. on the other hand, though, those messages that went to subscribers, those subscribers never saw those messages. so the ftc is saying this is

deceptive to the consumers who were not paying for paid subscriptions. the ftc, is quantifying for us how much match was able to pad the bottom line because of this? >> the f.t.c. didn't cite a damages figure. they did cite about half a million users signed up for paid subscriptions in basically a two-year period based on messages that were linked to fraudulent accounts. in the lawsuit, one of the things that the f.t.c. is asking for from the court is obviously an order to prevent match from continuing these practices, but also redress for consumers who lost money. >> what is match saying for their part? >> they came out with a pretty lengthy statement saying that this is a baseless lawsuit, and

they intend to fight it in court. they say that the agency is misrepresenting e-mails that they got from the company. match also sort of touts its ability to shut down fake accounts that are on its site. they cite something like 96% of fake sites are shut down right away. and they also say that this conduct is based only on match.com and not tinder. taylor: david, it is very interesting. analysts came out and said this was previously disclosed in the company's 2018 financial report.

j.p. morgan coming out and saying this f.t.c. suit is not new news. any sense that the f.t.c. is behind on this, and this may not actually be new? >> well, no, i think you saw the market reaction today. the stock dropped pretty significantly. it did recover afterwards. even though it was disclosed, companies will typically disclose investigations a lot. but this was today, the filing of the lawsuit. this is actually the f.t.c. taking actions, going a step further than just simply investigating. now of course it is up to a judge to decide sort of what happens next, and it is very possible that the case could be thrown out. but this is a significant action when an enforcement agency sues a public company. taylor: talking about all things dating sites, that was david mclaughlin. thank you for joining me. coming up, dropbox is dropping details on its revamped services. we will hear from the c.e.o. next. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: dropbox is going way beyond filesharing. the san francisco-based company announced new services wednesday, including a new desktop app that functions as a digital hub to let workers collaborate on projects with their colleagues. dropbox's ceo joins us now. talk to me about dropbox spaces. what does this do? drew: it has been a great day. we announced dropbox spaces, which is one of the biggest changes we have ever made to dropbox, and it is our first

step toward building what we call the smart workspace, which is a calmer, more focused work environment, and changes the dropbox experience from being a folder full of files to a collaborative team workspace for all your cloud content. this news becoming kind of app that brings all these other apps together and cuts down on the noise and makes it smarter and calm her. york, so im from new should have known that your name ow-ston.on and not h taylor: talk to me about how you are building on current customers or if you want dropbox spaces to be new customers. drew: we have built our entire business on collaborating on files, but with the smart workspace, we are going beyond that on a bunch of dimensions. first is supporting every kind

of cloud content. second is it is a much more engaging experience. in addition to the content, you can see all the conversations around it and the context around it, and you can send someone a slack message from dropbox or see your calendar or start a zoom meeting. we found users struggling to piece all this together. we see an opportunity to organize your working life across all these different tools while still maintaining a choice to use what you want to use. taylor: talk to me about topline revenue growth. when we dig into your financials, very strong double-digit topline growth. some analysts, though, at least on the average consensus on the terminal, say it looks like it could slow to the midteens. what are you doing to maintain that topline revenue growth?

--ough: drew: first, we start with a huge opportunity. in many ways, dropbox spaces expands on our opportunities because any companies or many teams need to collaborate on files, but every team needs to collaborate around content, so we start with solving a problem that every person in every company has, and with the new dropbox and with spaces, we are evolving the experience. now we have a new generation of our product that does a lot more for our users than we have in the past, and now our focus is getting in into people's hands. taylor: analysts are starting to forecast what could be your first annual profit in 2019. are you on track to reach those goals? >> it is a testament we have a really efficient and scalable business. balancing growth and profitability has always been important to us, and we have in many ways applied the consumer and our playbook to business software, so we have this really efficient self-serve motion where people spread the product for free, and that is how we have been able to reach -- that

is how we have been able to grow the business, and it has worked really well. taylor: there's been a lot of scrutiny recently on unprofitable companies. you've been public for about 18 months or so. what has been the biggest challenge? >> it has been pretty straightforward for us. in many ways, we lay the tracks for being a public company years before we ever filed for an ipo. the biggest challenge is actually something that i think is healthy for us, which is it's like being drafted into the majors. there's a big scoreboard. we've got to perform. it creates a big sense of urgency. on the one hand, there might be parts of that which are challenging, but i think in a lot of ways, it builds a healthy discipline into what you do, creates a lot of urgency. taylor: drew houston, ceo of dropbox, thank you for joining me. coming up, cyber security firm crowd strike found itself in the

middle of the trump-ukraine scandal. we will hear exclusively from the ceo next. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: it's the phone call summary read around the world. yes, that's the one where president trump asked the president of ukraine to work with his personal lawyer, rudy giuliani, and the u.s. attorney general to look into his political rival joe biden. trump said, "i would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with ukraine. they say crowdstrike. i would like you to do us a favor. i guess one of your wealthy people, the server, they say ukraine has it." to address these remarks, i

would like to welcome the ceo of crowdstrike. could you first react to those comments? >> the only reaction i have is in 2016, we performed a dnc investigation. we worked closely with the fbi and turned over all the forensic data, and we stand by the conclusions we have and they were backed up by the intelligence community. i think a lot of what we have done has already been said, and after that, you know, i do not understand where we are with things. taylor: fold this forward, then, into broader comments about where you think your company fits into general election security. george: election security, i think, is an important topic. if we think about how electronically connected we are with voting machines and we are past the hanging chads of yesteryear, i hope, but when we think about the ability to protect those systems, it is incredibly important for our democracy as well as the

integrity of the election itself, so it's a big topic. taylor: what is your role in working with, let's say, federal agencies like the fbi, or with the dnc or the rnc? where do you see yourself playing a role? >> we are certainly not partisan, so we help all sides of the aisle and work closely with a lot of state, local, and federal government agencies to make sure they have the best security in place going forward. taylor: i could do financial analysis all day long, so let's dig into some of the earnings and what we can expect from you. let's go through the income statement. talk to me about topline growth. i'm looking here, really solid, triple digits. expected to slow maybe a little bit in the coming years. where do you see sources of future growth? >> one of the things when you look at crowdstrike is its ability to cross sell modules. that is a key element of our success. when we started the company, we looked at companies like salesforce and thought there should be a pillar of cloud

cybersecurity. part of our success is being able to collect data, security telemetry at scale and be able to cross sell that into our customer base. if you look into our most recent earnings report, about 50% of our customers have four or more of these modules. we have 10 of them today. that has worked out in our favor in terms of being able to go back to our customer base in addition to getting new customers. taylor: has this shift to the cloud provided a lot of future opportunities? >> absolutely. i think that's one of the areas where we have seen a model we have created as a true native architecture be embraced. it's one of the reasons we have been so successful. , in point security delivered from the cloud was so popular. it is not just about endpoints and laptops and servers. it is really about protecting workloads, and those could be on premise or in a cloud like amazon or the google cloud, and that is really important. you have to be able to protect these wherever they are at.

taylor: when we look at the bottom line, not profitable yet, but losses are slowing. what is the pressure to be profitable? >> the way we look at it is first, what are the unit economics? we have really good unit economics, and some of the legacy -- i call them fossilized vendors get acquired, change their business model, try to move to the cloud, which is difficult for them to do, we think it is a great opportunity to go out and get new customers. we added 730 net new customers last year, over double from the year before. as long as we continue to increase the rate of adoption of our technology, we will continue to invest there, but the amount of money we spend on sales and marketing from a unit economic perspective is right where we want it to be. in fact, it is on the upward end up being very efficient. taylor: there has been a lot of market consolidation.

does consolidation help or hurt you? >> i think it is a net positive for us and a natural evolution of this market. if you look at what happened in salesforce automation, the natural comment around that is the fact that it was hard to shift from a perpetual model of legacy architecture into something that is cloud-based and truly subscription-based. a lot of the companies you talked about were having a hard time making the transition in the cloud architecture as well as their overall revenue model and had these mixed subscription models, which is very difficult. in june.ou ipo'ed it has been a tough year for some companies that maybe are not profitable, valuations still too high. any advice you can give on how to ride the wave? george: first, you have to start with a great company, and i think the elements of a great company that ride that wave, they have something to do with the cloud. they have a subscription revenue

model. they have high net retention rates where they keep adding new modules, and i think those are elements that make you successful. i think the market is smart enough to figure out what companies have great earnings potential in the future, and those are the requisite characteristics we have seen, and we are fortunate enough to fall into that category. taylor: thank you. that was crowd strike ceo george kurtz. still ahead, amazon is focusing on alexa privacy as it unveils new gadgets in seattle. we bring you the latest on the newest alexa products next. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: on wednesday, amazon introduced the echo studio, a high-end speaker to rival the apple home pod and google's home max. sonos shares fell 3% on the news. the new device looks similar to the homepod, making it

noticeably larger than any existing echo. the speaker costs $199 and is available on preorder on wednesday. i asked about the changes. >> we have really taken a different take on how audio is developed. basically, we have five speakers built into it, three midrange, that gives the sense of the music surrounding you, kind of how the artist wants the music to be portrayed, and we think that is an industry first, and we are looking forward to seeing how customers like it. taylor: you are taking on big rivals. sonos, apple, google. are you happy with your penetration rate? david: we think this isn't a winner-take-all game, first of all. you mentioned one of our great partners in sonos. they are great partners. we think customers want selection. that has always been the case with amazon. we offer lots of selection and choice.

we want to get that same choice, whether it is sonos or our products, and we are looking forward to seeing of customers like it. taylor: the pricing is interesting to me. it feels like everyone is really trying to be competitive here on pricing. are you worried that it is a race to zero? dave: i don't think so. we try to price our products with as much value as we possibly can. we have always had the philosophy to price our products in a way that we want to make when customers use those products, not when they buy them. if we give them good value and the service behind it is really compelling to the customer, they will use it for years and years. we think the price points we are at now are great. taylor: i was chuckling a little bit when the headline cross that said alexa will now tell when i'm frustrated with her. how will she be able to tell that, and then what does she do?

dave: we built a pretty deep machine-learning model to be able to recognize when customers are frustrated, and it is important to realize we are not checking whether you are frustrated with the world around you or detecting that or somebody in your family. we are only detecting when you are frustrated with alexa herself. when that happens, we want to try to teach alexa to autocorrect herself. the example i showed was a music example. i asked to play one track. she misunderstood. i got frustrated. she corrected herself. we think it will be valuable on the path as these digital systems, alexa specifically, become more conversational over time. taylor: when it comes to privacy controls, what new privacy controls have you added with these devices? dave: we did a lot on privacy today. we added new utterances that allow you to ask alexa, tell me what you heard, so she can clarify that. you can ask alexa in coming months, tell me why did you do that, so if she does something

that you did not think was right, you can understand the context of that. and we added a new feature at our privacy hub that gives the ability to auto-delete their voice utterances on a rolling window. we think customers will like that as well. taylor: in between that rolling three or 18-month window, confirm for me if there is audio listening, transcribing, recording before i delete those. dave: we have a different setting, and i think we are first in the industry to allow customers to opt out of human beings annotating any voice recording that we might have. you can also turn that off if you want, but some of the personalization of the service and some of the capabilities of the service will get worse if you do that, but if a customer wants to, we want to give them that option. and we have also had, from the very beginning, the ability for customers to delete any single utterance, any group of utterances, or all utterances

with the click of a button, and those are in the alexa privacy hub. the key for us is to give customers lots of options, and they can balance the level of with thezation level of privacy they want. taylor: why is it opt out instead of opt in? dave: like i said, a lot of the capabilities we get from those voice recordings makes the service more important. we just launched hindi in india last week, or maybe two weeks ago. we know that in the first three months, as long as we have enough data, that the service is going to get something like 33% better, more accurate on behalf of hindi-speaking customers. if we did not have that capability, we did not have those voice recordings, we could not make those improvements. the state of the art of the science would not allow us to do that. we hope customers will come with us on that journey and be able to have us do that to improve the service. if they don't want, they can opt out and delete their utterances, and everything will be fine.

taylor: as we talk about the competitive landscape and pricing on all these devices, i wonder if hardware is profitable for you. dave: we have always had the same business model when it comes to hardware, which is we strive to break even. where we want to profit is if customers use the device downstream. we do not want to make a lot of money when we sell you the kindle device, but if someone chooses to read books and likes books, we will make a little bit of profit from each book they choose to read. we think that is super aligned with customers. that means if they put it in a drawer and don't ever use the device, why should amazon get any profits from that? we were not successful in delivering what we wanted. it also has a side benefit that we do not invite customers to upgrade every year. we don't have to. we continue to update the software on our devices to make them better over time to

incentivize customers to use them, and we think that is a very good business model that aligns us with customers. taylor: that was amazon's senior vice president of devices and services. to discuss more about , my next guestnt joins me. what was your key take away from the new products you saw today? >> i saw amazon doubling down on two things. one is cementing the relationship we have with alexa in the home by giving us new use cases for existing devices as well as new devices to expand, if you like, alexa's capabilities within the home, and at the same time allowing us to take alexa outside the home. that so far has been a bit of a challenging situation for amazon. right now, alexa is a little bit trapped in our smartphones that are with us a lot of hours in a day and have other assistants on them.

taylor: are you worried about pricing? i'm looking at the echo studio $199 undercutting the homepod, $299. is this a race to gain market share? >> i think it is more about thinking, what is the product for amazon? for me, when i look at what they bring into market, the product is alexa, not the actual hardware, so for them, from a pricing perspective, that is the strategy. it is going to be much harder, to your point, about racing to the bottom, for hardware vendors that do not have a service that comes with that device that do not add a way to earn more revenue from that service, to obviously be competitively priced. taylor: what are your thoughts on the penetration rate of amazon's in-home devices relative to apple, relative to google?

>> if you look at the competition between the three, i would say over the past six to eight months, it continues to consolidate between google and amazon, amazon because of the broader range of products and price points and more time to market as well. i think outside the home is obviously a different story with google assistant and siri being more pervasive. for apple, the question, especially after today, to your point about home pod versus studio and their price point, it will be interesting to see how apple responds, if at all, with a cheaper home pod. taylor: i asked if hardware was profitable, and he said the goal was mostly to break even. is that good enough for you?

>> like i mentioned, it is good enough when you look at what else the hardware is driving, which is engagement with the brand, engagement with amazon.com, which is engagement with other services like prime music, possibly now music hd, so there's more that comes after they sell the hardware, and it is not something other hardware vendors have. taylor: how do you feel about data privacy? this is opt out, not opt in. is that ok? >> from a consumer perspective, it is an extra step. you would think the other way around would be easier, but at the same time, if you always have me opt out, if i don't think about it, my corrections with alexa do not necessarily get better. i think transparency is the key to all of this, so as long as

i'm aware as a customer of what the privacy settings are, then i should be good. what i liked today was that they had new utterances that i now have with alexa that do different things. they give me peace of mind because i can ask alexa not just to delete my data, but also why she responded or it responded to something i said. i get engaged with her, so my relationship continues, and at the same time, i get educated so that for a lot of customers, i think there's concern with lack of understanding. taylor: carolina milanesi, creative strategies principal analyst, thank you for joining me. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg technology," and "bloomberg technology" is livestreaming on twitter. technology, and @

be sure to follow our global news network at tictoc on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪ n twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪ devices are like doorways

that could allow hackers into your home. and like all doors, they're safer when locked. that's why you need xfinity xfi. with the xfi gateway, devices connected to your homes wifi are protected. which helps keep people outside from accessing your passwords, credit cards and cameras. and people inside from accidentally visiting sites that aren't secure. and if someone trys we'll let you know. xfi advanced security. if it's connected, it's protected. call, click, or visit a store today. >> the following is a paid

program. the opinions and views expressed do not reflect those of bloomberg lp, its affiliates, or its employees. >> the following is a paid presentation brought to you by rare collectibles tv. the california gold rush is considered to be one of the most impactful events to affect america's young economy during its first 100 years. it has certainly had a long-lasting impression in numismatic history as well. the people in california soon needed a way to standardize the value of the new gold, so they set up assayer's offices. they declared the value of the