♪ taylor: i'm taylor riggs and in for emily chang and , this is the "best of bloomberg: technology." we bring you all of our top interviews from this week. coming up, a deal three years in the making. the u.s. and china signed the phase one of the trade agreement. more on what the deal means for american technologies and huawei. plus, climate control. microsoft makes a major push into removing carbon from the

earth's atmosphere. we will get details from microsoft president and chief legal august -- legal officer. we will look at what an internet pioneer sees in the decade to come. now, after three years in the making, the u.s. and china signed phase one of the trade deal on wednesday. president trump and chinese vice premier put pen to paper for a deal that the president claims will have a significant impact on the tech world. pres. trump: china has made enforceable commitments regarding the protection of american ideas, trade secrets, patents, and trademarks. they have also agreed to confront pirated goods, which is a big problem for many people in the room. taylor: those people in the room being those of the likes of executives from micron,

qualcomm, ebay, and others. i spoke to the director of digital and cyberspace policy on the council of foreign relations in new york. and in washington, bloomberg's eddie collins. >> we have learned that the u.s. and china have taken the first step to negotiate some big imports into the u.s. in terms of china promising to commit to buying of more u.s. products, as well as some concessions in terms of enforcement around intellectual property protection and patents, as you mentioned, so, essentially, china is saying we are committing to about $200 billion in additional product purchases from the u.s. in exchange for those reductions of tariffs, which we saw announced in december, where the u.s. did not go through with the december tariffs that were threatened, as well as it did a reduction of some tariffs that were put on in september, but some of the stickiest issues are still out there and awaiting a phase two

deal that the administration says they are going to start on soon but could take a long time to finalize. taylor: adam, i want to show you a chart that i have inside my terminal, which has been a fundamental issue behind this trade deal, which is u.s. imports from china growing, growing, and growing, and that the tariffs will remain for the foreseeable future going into phase two. in your opinion, while they are still tariffs remaining that are outstanding, did the signing today represent at least some sort of business confidence, some sort of resolution, removing some of the uncertainty that broadly can help businesses move forward? adam: i think a very little bit of uncertainty. i think u.s. businesses are going to be very skeptical that china is going to follow through on the enforcement on i.t. protections and their requirements to no longer force technology transfers. i think they are going to be

skeptical on how open the chinese economy is going to become, because phase two is really going to address a lot of the industrial policy issues, the subsidies, the support for state owned enterprises, really a lot of the tricky knots in this relationship, so i think people are going to be glad that this first phase is done. it is signed, but there are a lot of hard issues that still are waiting for us in the future. taylor: peggy, at least for now, are technology companies happy about some of the things we were able to agree on? peggy: well, it is interesting, because one of the astounding things about this deal signing today is that it was over an hour in terms of the trump administration, and president trump, hailing the agreement, and he called out a lot of ceo's and ceo's in the room, including those in the tech industry, who he said should be happy with the -- about the deal, but there was also huawei, which was not a part of the deal but is a source

of great tension between the two nations and of great consequence for the technology companies out there, like macron and qualcomm, as well. -- micron and qualcomm, as well. taylor: well, adam, what about your thoughts about forced tech transfers and some the issues surrounding i.t. theft? -- ip theft? adam: the chinese agreed not to force technology transfers through joint ventures, or formal or informal methods, but the problem is the chinese has -- have always said it had enforced technology transfers. it is just the state of the market that u.s. and foreign companies have chosen to move manufacturing, or form r&d centers, or shift joint ventures, so the chinese are agreeing to do something they have never done before.

on the ip side, this this is in the direction that china itself wants to move. china has been increasing its own ability to enforce i.p. laws. it wants to be able to protect ip reform because it wants to protect chinese firms that produce it. there may be more traction in this space, but the proof is really going to be in the pudding. taylor: adam, what would you like to see in terms of the execution around those two issues? adam: i think we will have to see some really high-profile cases of china penalizing firms, the ones which u.s. firms say have stolen or other illegal forms to get u.s. business or trade secrets. i think we're going to have to see more cases brought. there has been success, but more of those cases. and, in particular, we're going

to see firms saying look, we do not need to joint venture any longer. we do not need to have higher tech manufacturing. but those are all things that are going to take a much longer time. taylor: that was adam of the council on foreign relations and bloomberg's peggy collins. the signing marks the first phase of a broader trade pact. however, the pact avoids dealing with issues of huawei's access to american markets and suppliers. i got reaction from huawei's director of congressional affairs. >> it is an interesting and fairly broad agreement. really agreements are mixed in how the institutions work. but it is a good sign of an agreement in phase one. taylor: what do you want to see from phase two? don: huawei is a global company, but it is also privately owned. -- privately held company.

like any global company, we look for trade stability as well as open markets. preached that, and we hope that is the result down the road for phase two or three. taylor: you mentioned you are a global company. how has the impact been from the trade tensions? don: like any company, there is always tension with supply. alway you have issues that ared into politics. there is always tension, but huawei always have plans in place so the effect has not been that drastic. like any company, you are looking for stability and free markets. taylor: it was interesting. we heard from treasury secretary steve mnuchin who said huawei is , not a chess piece in the trade fight. he wants it to remain a clear, security issue,

separate from trade. do you agree that that is how it should be treated? don: in either case, huawei's mission is to connect the world. the issues enumerated by the u.s. government get to basic issues of trust, but also get to basic issues of security. the goal for huawei and the u.s. government is the same. we provide robust and secure networks. we share the same goal. the dialogue needs to center on that how to get there most effectively to the benefit of global consumers, but specifically consumers in the united states. taylor: what is huawei doing to ensure our data is being protected from beijing? don: if you look at our huawei's cybersecurity efforts, we are one of the first to put together an end to end cybersecurity program. cybersecurity for this company is not open arm. it is a process that goes

through every process in the company. we also go the extra mile, which no other vendor in our business has done. opened a cybersecurity center in england and brussels as well. said whenltic testifying before the parliament, we stand naked before you. we have come through fairly well in our industry. taylor: can you tell us that no data has ever been turned over to beijing? given that is some of the issues from the u.s. and others? don: absolutely not. the head of the company has said he has never gotten a request from beijing or other companies. if you look at how huawei handles our relationships with is in business with 45 of the top broadband providers and have a long track that has -- has a long track record. not a single major cybersecurity

events can be traced back to huawei's equipment. the reason being is huawei takes cybersecurity seriously. we do not have access to the data unless given specific broadband by the provider who controls that access. our customers in the united states any invitation for us to , put our clement in the network is with special, monitored laptops with no chance for us to access data we don't have. 'sylor: that was huawei director of congressional affairs, don morrissey. coming up, microsoft joins the global movement fight climate change. we will hear from its president and chief legal officer brad smith about the plans they have -- tech giants have in store. and if you like bloomberg news, check us out on the radio. you can listen on the bloomberg

app, or bloomberg.com. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: microsoft made a major investment announcement in the effort to fight climate change. it will invest $1 billion in companies and organizations working on technology to reduce or remove carbon from the earth's atmosphere. i sat down with microsoft's president and chief legal officer, brad smith. brad: microsoft's commitment to day to put a billion dollars into climate innovation is part of a broader plan but the fund itself will really be focused on accelerating innovation and climate reduction and removal of of technology where money is not flowing already. one area that we see being of paramount importance is the creation of new and better technology that will enable us all to remove carbon from the atmosphere.

another area where we see a critical need for money where it is not yet flowing is, for example, project finance for renewable energy sites in developing markets. some parts of the world perhaps especially in the united states and western europe where capital is already flowing for new renewable energy. not everywhere. we want our money to make a difference. taylor: are you really looking outside the u.s. to deploy this $1 billion? brad: certainly we are looking outside the united states. especially when it comes to the creation of new places that will generate renewable energy. but when it comes to technology innovation, it doesn't know boundaries. it doesn't know specific countries. i am sure there will be some of this flowing inside the united states, across europe, and perhaps around the world. taylor: as you take a look at microsoft's goals, you have a

plan by at least 2030 to be carbon negative. where are we on achieving that goal? brad: well, i think in many ways, the most ambitious thing we are seeing today is as you just mentioned, we will be carbon negative as a company by 2030, not just for our company , but for our supply chain. for our so-called value chain. by 2050, we will remove from the environment all of the carbon that microsoft has emitted either directly or for electrical consumption since we were founded in the year 1975. that is a big goal. we have a detailed plan, but we have a lot of work to do. that's why we say this is a decade-long ambition for us. taylor: you are working with a lot of your suppliers and customers to make sure they are doing their own initiatives in terms of being carbon neutral as well. how are you folding in these goals with perhaps some

contracts with suppliers and customers, making sure they are being held accountable as well? brad: it requires a detailed plan which we have been putting together over the past months. one aspect when it comes to supply, naturally the supply of electricity for ourselves. what we are saying today is that by the year 2025, we will have purchase agreements in place for 100% renewable energy for all of our data centers, all of our buildings, and all of our campuses worldwide. there is all of the other emissions that are generated as part of our supply chain. as you said we will be , implementing by next year new tools and processes for our suppliers. we will want to see consistent measurement of their emissions. we want to help our suppliers with new tools so they can reduce their emissions. we will be talking with our suppliers in the coming months. i think you can expect to see us move forward with new economic

incentives so that as we are buying goods and services, we are focused on encouraging our suppliers to reduce their emissions, and if they do, i think they're going to find it easier to sell their products to microsoft. taylor: that was microsoft's brad smith. coming up, fintech on fire. visa agrees to pay $5.3 billion for plaid. the price is double their last valuation. later, the aol cofounder and current chairman and ceo of revolution and his tech trends for 2020. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: this week, we saw $5.3 a major deal $5.3 billion for an , intake company that connects venmo to customer data in the banking system. the price has doubled in a 2018 funding round. i spoke tuesday to bloomberg's senior analyst julie. >> plaid has 2600 fintech customers. it has venmo, acorn, coinbase. it gives visa customers to sell into. plaid also really has been a u.s.-based company. visa is in a great position to internationally with the plaid services.

longer-term,t, visa sees it as an opportunity to sell payment services into fintech. that will mean more payment transactions across the visa global network. taylor: i want to bring you back in here. earlier, we had a general partner and a plaid investor talking about getting into the space. take a listen. >> we have a lot of traditional financial institutions that are starting to think about, what is our software strategy? how do we stay relevant? how continue growing? -- how do we continue growing? then you have a lot of software companies realizing the benefit of fintech. thinking about offering more financial type services. with infrastructure like plaid, it becomes much easier to bundle that into software. if you think about visa, the rationale for acquiring plaid, it was really about growth and it was about expanding.

taylor: what do you make of those comments? sonali: it is pretty amazing because when you look at some of the big stories of last year. wework, peloton, trying to command technology multiples. they had a somewhat hard time. a lot of the software companies won out. people expect a lot of mergers and acquisitions to happen in the cyberspace. it seems like we have a pretty perfect marriage here where the software people family financial industry and the financial industry had a real need for the software people. that they have just been burning for. otherwise, they would half to pay up so much to be hiring. the partnership has been working quite well. i don't know how many exits we can see that are this big. but remember, there are a lot of interesting fintech companies that have ballooning valuations, including striped, which is -- stripe, which is the most valuable startup in america right now. taylor: that was julie and sona

li. this week was earnings season for many u.s. banks, citing technology as a key driver of growth. that investment could be bringing a big change to bonus wall street's bonus culture as traders may have to unlearn some of their most basic assumptions about making money. for more, i spoke to our finance reporter on monday. >> what we are unlearning is that bonuses are maybe a thing of the past. in the past, traders were always judged as these big players in the markets who could make outsized bets and outsized profits and money on the back of that. but now, because of automation and electronicification, the machines are doing the work for them so they cannot garner that kind of paycheck anymore. taylor: you and i joke about this all the time, instead of going back to cfa school, we will go to coding school. what happens to those traders who do not yet know how to code?

lananh: there is a range of things, but what traders are trying to do now, at least the smart ones, trying to build in the transition for the future. while they may never be heavy or data scientists or phd's in physics, they need to get up to speed at least with some of the techniques being used on the street whether it is algorithm ,ic trading or electronic trading. they need to at least understand a little bit of machinery behind the work in order to stay relevant. it does not mean that they are going to write the code, necessarily, but they have to have some fluency with that topic. taylor: even though traders of that type are in high demand, it is not necessarily translating into a raise in compensation. why the discrepancy? interesting. a recruiter i spoke to said that even though they are in high demand and all firms want to make sure they have a lot of talent, that does not necessarily mean that the salaries and bonuses have come

up in any substantial way. there is an emphasis on cutting costs, which means that the basic level of skill you have to have will require more technical skill. taylor: do you think this is really just the beginning of what looks like a broader structural change undergoing the financial markets at this point? lananh: i do. a lot of the experts have also said the same. as well as some traders lamenting the good old days of the past. it does seem the technical skills will stay with us and the pace of technological innovation and movement is going to continue. if people want to stay relevant they need to learn, upskill, and make the transition into an automated future. taylor: any other reaction from the street? lananh: a lot of emails from traders saying, i wish i had gotten up to speed, and maybe i should take a class or something. there have been a lot of soul-searching emails from my

sources today, saying they are thinking ahead. taylor: can you remind us of size and scope? how many actual jobs are we talking about that have the potential to be automated? lananh: the people i spoke to have not really said because i think it is too wide to quantify. i think everyone's job is going to be affected by technology. there is not a precise number. all of the roles in equities, foreign-exchange, a lot of these markets that are highly electronic are already seeing this change. and then on top of that, everyone is talking about the bond market becoming more automated as well. those are the most intuitive markets to see this transformation. eventually, this could head into investment banking as well. taylor: that was bloomberg's lananh nguyen. coming up, we will hear from the head of one of the biggest hospital systems in the u.s. my conversation with the ceo of providence saint joseph's health , next.

"bloomberg technology" is livestreaming on twitter. check us out and be sure to follow our global breaking news network on quick take on twitter. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: welcome back to "best of bloomberg: technology." i'm taylor riggs. the intersection of health care and technology was never more apparent than at the j.p. morgan health care conference this past week in san francisco. it is a place where partnerships are announced and formed and predictions are made. one of the biggest hospital systems, providence saint joseph's, announced a partnership with microsoft in july. it's ceo, rod hochman, joins me now with his predictions for health care in 2020. rod: we are seeing this revolution in the digital front

end of health care where all folks really want to do is he able to figure out who their doctor is, what's wrong with them, and do it with a couple of clicks. taylor: who have been some of the biggest disruptors and do those disruptors continue in 2020? rod: there are a list of them. i think everyone wants to do health care. we're seeing the walmarts of the world in health care. amazon is an health care. plus, there are a lot of startups working particularly in the ambulatory space. to see what they can be doing in health care. so i don't even worry about my traditional competitors anymore. i really think about all of the electronic startups that are around us. we have to figure out how to partner with those and create that digital front end to make it easy for our 13 million customers to get in touch with us. taylor: so do you view amazon's early entry into the race as a threat or a very good motivator?

[laughter] rod: that is a good one. i think both. i think both is the answer. there are certain things we will do with folks like amazon. i think what we saw in our microsoft arrangement, they really wanted to help us make health care better and not necessarily compete with us in our core business. and so that, for us, made a lot of sense. this comprehensive relationship that we have looking at health care in hospitals or what health care spot of the future looks like is something we are working on together. taylor: the big thing when you talk about health care and technology is data privacy and holding onto that sensitive information. are health systems prepared to work with big tech on data privacy, and has big tech done enough to protect health care data? rod: you said it perfectly. i think we are very worried.

one thing our patients trust us with is with their data. and they don't want to see us giving away their data to someone else and it being out there, being utilized -- we have been very protective about that relationship. so we are looking for tech partners that will understand that and we think the difference is the consumer has to be in control of their data and they have to be a partner in this. it is not just that i will give up my data and hope something happens. i think the consumer wants to be a partner in this data transfer and understand what protections they have in giving that information over. man,or: that was rod hoch ceo of providence saint joseph's health. small-cap companies like lab core and tele-doc also playing an important role in health care tech. this topic is part of the conversation i had with lisa gill, head of health care

technology and distribution at jp morgan. she has been a leading member of the health care equity research team at jp morgan for 16 years. lisa: lab core, on the lab-side, the integration is more between medical and diagnostic. so they have a cro, marrying that together with a lab company, they have done really well in being able to do patient recruitments, bringing new technology from a medical perspective to the marketplace. teladoc is one of our favorite names on the tele-health side. the cost of the services. they announced an acquisition yesterday of a company called intouch. so now this creates a broader platform for them to be able to touch people in the hospital, at home. they have a great relationship with cvs. so, in the stores at cvs. that opportunity to bring in position. taylor: as you look at companies making heavy investments within

ai, how is that poised to be a disruptor within health care? lisa: when you start thinking about artificial intelligence, i think there are a lot of things. when you start making test -- when you start thinking about making decisions around health care, where artificial intelligence can play a part, looking at things like value-based care, that's the direction this country needs to move in. we have to move away from fee-for-service to value-based care. where the artificial intelligence comes in and lists patient populations, say if you are a diabetic, what will happen to you next? what are the things we need to do to keep you healthy? and not just from a physical perspective but how about a mental perspective? that is where companies like teledoc come into play. they have programs with better health where you can get the help with that individual, that psychologist, to walk through not just your physical ailments but your mental ailments. taylor: were the threats of amazon entering this space overblown? lisa: this will sound strange to you right now, but i think amazon coming into any space is

actually really good for those companies. the reason i believe that, companies in turn make big investment to try to compete against this, and it makes them better and smarter. so when you think about a platform like amazon, really tailored to the consumer, a lot of b2b companies, how they will put technology in the marketplace. what technology they need to put in place in order to compete. taylor: do you feel like that makes companies better off now ago? our years they have been forced to integrate. lisa: you have had a lot of consolidation. with healthcare services you've seen cvs come together with aetna. united health care has a massive platform, from a healthcare services perspective. and i think a lot of that is because of competition in the marketplace. how do you drive down costs, how do you drive efficiencies? and companies like amazon, the threat of an amazon, really creates the opportunity for these companies to think about things differently.

taylor: that was my conversation with lisa gill, jp morgan chase managing director and senior analyst. coming up, jeff bezos said "the 21st century is going to be the indian century." but will the country welcome amazon and other big tech firms? we'll have more, next. and also still ahead, ai, health care, wellness, and big tech backlash. we will talk about it all with aol cofounder and ceo of revolution steve case. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: u.s. big tech companies are trying to push into india, but not everyone is welcome. on his trip to new delhi, jeff bezos faced large protests across the country. meanwhile, india's attitude

towards apple and samsung appears to be rather positive. to discuss how india is reacting to the influx of foreign tech firms, i spoke to a distinguished fellow at harvard law school. if you look at what amazon does, they eat entire industries. look at the monopoly they have built in the united states. india is really worried about that. so i think what they are doing in trying to restrict amazon is sensible. i know amazon may be very popular here, but i agree with some indian policies trying to hold amazon back because we have not done that here. look at the damage. it is building a monopoly over here. taylor: what are some policies you are talking about what modi has done to help moderate or control some of the influx? >> well, in this case with amazon, with jeff bezos the reason they are getting such a negative reaction is there are lots of anti-trust laws. if you have an open platform, you cannot be selling against

the merchants on the platform. that is exactly what amazon does here. every time something is successful, it shows up in amazon basics and the merchants who are creating other competitive products go out of business. what india is trying to prevent, this kind of monopolistic behavior. that is why there is a negative reaction to it. on the other hand, with apple and samsung, modi has been rolling out the red carpet for apple and samsung to manufacture their phones there. india realizes that china has become a big problem and there's a lot of pressure to move manufacturing to the heart of china. they are saying to come here, they will give you facilities and we have a very large market for you, and we will welcome you. taylor: i want to take all these companies piece by piece. let's start with amazon. how do you make inroads given you show up and are greeted with protests. >> well, first of all you don't break laws. like what they are doing with this antitrust investigation, amazon has been playing games.

they have third-party companies -- they cannot sell their own amazon basics products over there, they buy a company, put it under the guise of a different company, and promote the heck out of it. so these are anti-competitive inaviors that amazon does the united states, it is also doing in india, it should not do that. if it is going to be a neutral marketplace, it's a neutral marketplace. so it needs to obey the laws, do what is right not only in india but also in the west. europe is also imposing restrictions on amazon. amazon is out of line over there and this is why people protest. these people don't want to be dependent on amazon for their livelihoods. what they are worried about is that amazon will start undercutting them and put hundreds of thousands of people out of business. that is what the worry is -- rightfully so, by the way. is not justt amazon, but microsoft. their ceo has been critical of india as well. you have been talking about how he isolated himself from india because of the religious-based citizenship laws.

how do you, again, work with india while not commenting on things you do not agree with? >> well, microsoft is very well-respected and satya nadella is a legend over there. i think he made a mistake by commenting on this new policy they have which says we welcome minorities from neighboring countries except if they are muslims. that is a very contentious issue. satya made comments about it, which were actually inaccurate. and he got in a lot of trouble for it, and i'm sure he regrets it, but there is no issue with microsoft being open over there. as far as being critical about the united states? we have muslim bans here and an inability to accept refugees. we discriminate against african-americans. why don't we clean up our own house first? that is what the arguments are about satya nadella commenting

like this. yes, there are problems here but there are also problems in america. comment on america before you start criticizing us, and that is fair criticism also. sadia is widely respected and microsoft has done wonders in india. taylor: it's not all bad news. because you smartly pointed out at the beginning of this conversation that apple and samsung have had a different experience over there. they have been perhaps more welcomed and looked at receiving some subsidies from india to gain some inroads. what is the difference in tactics between the companies received well and those that are not? >> in the case of microsoft, i think there was just a glitch over here. the company is doing well and it is very well-respected. satya nadella is a legend in india because of what he has achieved. there is no issue there. amazon is a big problem here and the problem here is amazon itself. it is not the country that is

the problem. it is amazon's monopolistic ways which are tolerated in the united states. they should not be tolerated over there. taylor: what about apple and samsung? >> right. they are doing very well and they are being encouraged to move many factories. indians have not been buying high-end apple phones because samsung phones are better, but there are not really issues with those companies. our guest froms harvard law school. zen meat has been dubbed chinese version of impossible foods and launched its plant-based meat products on the market last year. tomcofounder spoke to mackenzie on the sidelines of the greater china conference in shanghai on how competition for the market is shaking out in china. >> the government definitely wants more plant protein intake or consumers, chinese consumers.

also, unfortunately, we had last year that doubled the effect of the plant-based food sector. so a lot of food companies are noticing this new area. like our competitors in the u.s. like beyond meat and impossible foods, they have done very successful marketing and product development in the u.s. market. so, people are expecting if there is a company or a market for mainland china. tom: do you have an estimate for the value of the market in china over the next five, 10 years? is there a dollar number you are putting to your investors? vince: it is very hard to tell right now, but what we have is a very solid prediction. in china, plant-based milk or

plant-based drinks is about 15% of the dairy market. --if let-based meat plant-based meat could be up to 15% of the meat market in china. tom: you were talking about impossible foods and beyond meat. they are knocking at the door of the chinese market but they do face some regulatory hurdles. how do you ensure that you can be in a position to fend off that competition? vince: i don't see that as competition right now because we are too small. we are just a small and starting out company, and really excited to go to mainland china. because that is going to open the market and educate people. our reason and main goal is the same, to get people into more plant-based proteins, more plant-based foods rather than animal-based foods. we have the same vision and same results that we want to achieve.

so it's going to be better to enter the chinese market as soon as possible. tom: as soon as possible. you welcome the entrance of other foods into the market? vince: of course. tom: what is the funding situation for zen meat right now? vince: we are open to possible investors from the u.s. and of course mainland china. more and more local investors are taking notice of this too. investors from the u.s. or europe are more familiar with this field, and they also share the vision of why alternative protein is an important factor food and agriculture. we are looking at one million to 2 million usd? >> that you will be raising in -- tom: that you will be raising in the next couple of months? vince: yes. taylor: that was zen meat cofounder vince lu.

up next, the chairman of revolution defines the tech trends that will dominate in 2020. this is bloomberg. ♪

taylor: finally this hour, there seems to be no shortage of tech news shaking the industry. among the big themes, customer data, privacy, antitrust. for more on what to expect this year, i was joined by steve case, aol cofounder and ceo of revolution. he has been traveling the u.s. seeking startups and innovation hubs outside of silicon valley. >> this is our ninth road trip and we have visited 43 cities around the country.

we are trying to shine a spotlight on these interesting entrepreneurs. silicon valley will continue to be a center of innovation, but right now it's crazy that all venture capital goes there and other places, like new york and boston, last year 75% of capital went to three states and all other states, oklahoma, ohio, michigan or other states get less than 1%. we are trying to level the playing field and create more venture capital, entrepreneurs to create more jobs in more parts of the community so we can have a more inclusive innovation economy, where everyone feels they have a stake in the future. can be part of the future as opposed to a few entrepreneurs in a few places. it is exciting to see what is happening in these cities. received fun has now -- the seed fund has now backed over 100 companies in over 70 cities, 30 states. we're just getting started. it's exciting to see what's happening in the rest of the country and not just the coast. taylor: it would not be a good interview with an entrepreneur if we did not get some of your top 10 predictions for the next

decade as we wrap up the last decade. reading through your blog, one thing that stuck out was the rise of health and wellness in the startups. thisder, as increasingly becomes bigger and bigger, how much of this appears overvalued given there is so healthtention on hel already? health and wearables? >> you ain't seen nothing yet. health is one of the most important parts of our everyday lives and it is right for disruption. a lot of the focus has been on the wellness side of things. the fitbit and others, because that is a consumer decides, the consumer pays decision. easier to go to market. a lot of the focus over the next 10 years, the core of the health care system. what is really a sick care system. a lot of companies doing really interesting things. there's a chicago company using machine learning ai to diagnose cancer more precisely so people know what they are dealing with and there can be a more

personalized approach to diagnosis and treatment. so you will see a lot more of that. the convergence of technology to provide better health care more conveniently with better outcomes and at a lower cost. taylor: another one of your big predictions, more tech backlash. do you think the problem here is that there is not enough trust between the consumers and the owners of that data as well? how do you get more trust so there is not that big backlash we have started to see? steve: two areas, one is the consumer side of things. consumers still love their technology, iphones and netflix, other things, but they are starting to get a little more concerned in terms of what companies are doing with their data. they are concerned about the elections given some of the things happening around facebook. so they are getting a little more anxious, what they thought were all positive, maybe there is some negative. as a result, not surprisingly, the policymakers, whether it be

d.c. orbc or -- here in other places, they are saying this technology is allowing things to happen, but how do we strike the right balance in terms of managing this. what you will see in the short run, because of this backlash, including regulatory backlash, probably a look on the antitrust side, some of these big companies, being facebook, google getting broken up, that may or may not happen but i minimum these companies will be a little bit more careful about making new acquisitions and that will have an interesting impact in the startup sector, maybe open up opportunities in sectors that right now look locked down by the incumbents. taylor: you are looking at a continued rise in e-commerce. does someone come in and disrupt amazon? steve: amazon looks to be in a good position. walmart and amazon are duking it out. obviously they had different strategies, but they are starting to converge. one was physical, the other was digital. now they are both doing a bricks and clicks type of strategy. but that is not the only place to focus. most of the attention is on what

is happening on the direct to consumer side of things. there are many companies that have formed, warby parker, frame bridge and others capitalizing on the e-commerce boom. there are also a lot of great companies doing things on the back end. but companies like big commerce focusing on reverse logistics. what happens when products get returned. freightway, figuring out where trucks should go to deliver the products. so the e-commerce revolution is not just what is happening when you order a product and someone delivers it to you, it's all the infrastructure happening around it and that will continue to accelerate in the next decade. taylor: steve, we have just less than a minute. i wanted to get your thoughts given we just surpassed the 20 year anniversary of the aol-time warner merger. looking back, if you had the chance to redo it, would you? >> i would do the deal, but i would execute it a little differently. strategically what we were trying to do, not just 20 years ago, we were trying to drive the convergence of what we have seen over the last 20 years. things like netflix, the ipod. things that did not exist 20

years ago and have become significant parts of everyday life. those two companies, aol time -- aol and time warner together had the potential to do that but they never worked well together. there was a culture clash, a bunch of other challenges. it is great to see companies like disney bring the whole company together in an aggressive, integrated way to launch something like disney plus. i wish we had seen that 20 years ago, when we put aol and time warner together. the quote i had used in the past is thomas edison said, "vision without execution is hallucination." and sadly, that is how i think about that merger. great promise but it was obviously a disappointment. taylor: that was steve case, revolution chairman and ceo, and cofounder of aol. that does it for this edition of "best of bloomberg: technology." we'll bring you all the latest in tech throughout the week. tune in each day at 5:00 p.m. new york and 2:00 p.m. in san francisco. and bloomberg technology is livestreaming on twitter, check nology and follow

our global breaking news network on twitter at quick takes. this is bloomberg. ♪

brad: he grew up in what he calls the people's republic of berkeley, a liberal city on the east shore of the san francisco bay. as a child, he played football while reciting rap lyrics and solving equations in advanced calculus. this ability to multitask and see the world through different prisms has helped him become an entrepreneur, ceo of a tech company, and eventually one of the most well-known and respected investors on sand hill road. with marc andreessen by his side, he has invested in some of tech's biggest names in the last decade -- facebook, slack, airbnb, lyft, and dozens more. i'm brad stone, in for emily