meanwhile, across the hall, representative marjorie taylor greene from georgia posted a video to facebook. her video showed her putting up a trans phobic sign so that representative newman, the mother of a trans child, could "look at it every time she opens her door." facebook allowed representative greene's video to remain online. is that right, yes or no? caroline: you have been watching the tech hearing on capitol hill. we will be returning in a moment, but this is "what'd you miss." i'm joined by joe weisenthal. the dividend to buy back limits have been placed in major u.s. banks will end june 1 for most lenders, so says the federal reserve. we knew that some share buyback limits have been lifted for the big banks in the united states. now the dividend limits are also

being ended. perhaps the end to those restrictions were coming friday end of this month. --by the end of this month. joe: we were wondering when this would happen. these steps were rolled out for a while and telegraphed a little bit. june 30, some of these restrictions are going to end for banks that passed the stress test. joining us now is sonali basak. how long have people been anticipating this, and i guess trying to game out which bank stands to benefit the most from the opportunity to make the capital structure -- sonali: listen, joe, the big have gotten bigger through this crisis. people are waiting for them to return the capital to shareholders will you have seen that hope in the share price, you have seen jp morgan rise 20% this year, you have kim goldman, 25 -- you have seen goldman, 25%. there are political things that remain.

the banks are healthy, they have been able to make it through the worst of the crisis. but we have seen these banks hesitant to lend, taking a lot of deposits, lending ratios quite low historically. there are political pressures around how much money they should be giving back to shareholders vs. lending out to the broader economy that is quite weak. >> talking of political pressure, sherrod brown, elizabeth warren, saying no, we need to keep these rules in place and built figure capital buffers, but i suppose with the rather hard-hitting news on the average ratio we got at the end of last week, perhaps we should be unsurprised. sonali: absolutely, caroline. what happens in the short-term as you get past the immediate pandemic responses and what happens in the longer-term, as you see the fed changed its strategy around the big banks, because we may see caning -- it

is very politically fraught. we don't really know where the rules are going to go in the longer-term. to your point, sherrod brown and elizabeth warren have also been pretty critical of pandemic loans by goldman, given that standards were loosened during the crisis. will that kind of scrutiny spread to the other banks? you can see all the bank shares are up because immediate returns to shareholders are very significant for the banks. they have had record years, and as you saw by the results last quarter for the first quarter, that only points to better times ahead in capital markets and trading activities in first-quarter results as we see them in april. what happens with the longer-term crackdown on how banks use their money? joe: you mentioned politics of this, and that was fed into the decision to sunset the slr exemption.

how much does this particular news raise hackles? sonali: listen, remember can we out through ppp program part two, and firms are having trouble getting my, the issues we saw in the first round of the program starting to come up again? the fun of claimant --the unemployment rate very unequal. however, we are also waiting on a rebound potentially of the community reinvestment act, a lot more eyes on how banks lend to low income communities and borrowers that are struggling. we don't know what will happen with the fiction moratorium's post and hold whose to problems, joe -- a whole host of problems, joe. there is the near term, and that is money back to shareholders with all of these gangbusters trading results and investment banking results that are continuing on. caroline: it was back in

december we got news on the share buybacks and immediately jp morgan came out with a headline saying they would reenact them. and what is it terms of capital paid back versus the shared buyback to the dividend? sonali: i pulled up the most recent jp morgan results because jp morgan authorized 4.5 billion worth of buybacks after paying the 90--- the $.90 dividend. there is money being paid back even before what the fed is now allowing for if this could add more fuel to the fire, you are seeing these rises in the share price is from after a significant rally this year. it should help the bank that are still trading close to book value and under book value. jp morgan is getting to two times book value. caroline: meanwhile, we did have

the breaking news of robinhood as well. it was reported they are looking to help retailers get into ipo's. we know that if you are a user of robinhood, you will be able to buy into its ipo. a revolutionary or not is this for retailers to get into initial stock offerings? sonali: if they can get it done, right, caroline? it is becoming more of a silicon valley trend to make that kind of thing happen. what reuters is reporting is they are building technology to make this happen across the industry for some joe, it reminds me of the equity end of the world where they allow you to buy pre-ipo stock. this democratization of the market is happening for some time. it is not so easy. how will the banks help alongside robinhood make this happen? joe: people of the idea of getting ipo's because they see these pumps, but no one is giving you free money.

maybe a little bit of incentive, but people are not getting rich on it. sonali: the way this works is the private banks will sell stocks to high net-worth individuals and that in itself is part where you don't know what the disclosures even look like yet, the sec may want to weigh in on that. caroline: ipo's to share buybacks and dividends. we thank you on the latest news on robinhood and the fed. we will be digging into federal reserve policy changes. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> we did our part to secure the integrity of the election, and then on january 6, president trump gave a speech rejecting the results and calling on people to fight. i believe the former president should be responsible for his words and the people who broke the lock should be responsible for their actions. our response abilities to make sure we build effective systems -- >> did not answer the question for mr. pichai, yes or no? >> we always see a deep sense of responsibility, but we work hard this election, one of our most expensive efforts. >> is that yes or no? >> congress meant, it is a complex question -- >> ok, we will move on. mr. dorsey? >> yes, but you have to take into consideration the broader ecosystem. it is not how the technology platforms are used. joe: there you have some of the online conversation from d.c. today--enlightening conversation

from d.c. today. let's bring in a former sec google partner. thank you for joining us. there is always this risk that people are talking for years -- is there a crackdown,, something major on speech, something major on competition? we have got used to these hearings and they are often not particularly enlightening. from your perspective, do you see any meaningful turn coming such that the business models of these tech companies may be under threat at some point? >> i think we need to start with having more information. always disappointing about today and honestly the last three months is we don't know that much more than what we knew on january 6 good think about it, joe, if january 6 had been an airline accident,, we would have actual data about what actually happened while with the tech platforms, we don't really know how good they were at removing even illegal content.

we are not talking about things like misinformation. i think we need to be much better educated in our government needs to set up something like the ntsb to oversee this stuff. if we can oversee airlines, why can't we oversee social media? only then will we have meaningful change. otherwise you have this political theater that isn't going anywhere. caroline: important to saying that as the commerce were billions of dollars when you were there. you have gone to an ad-free search service instead. your view, therefore, on the regulatory impact you hope to come out of this? an oversight board, or something that needs more deeply to be changed? >> i'm just saying that oversight over information will allow us to be more educated about what kinds of changes to

things like section 230 are reasonable to make. i have argued, for example, that we need to separate out what i call granik content -- organic content that you or joe sure to follow us on twitter vs. stuffed dog rhythmically amplified by the platform--stuff that is algorithmically amplified by the platform. these are things that they could be doing. of course what i'm doing is completely different from the business models out there. we are a private search engine because we think it leads to the user and customer having a better experience over time. joe: you talk about the distinction between more organic sharing and more algorithmic things designed to go viral. people post a lot of nonsense on

different social-media platforms and they don't do it part of a coordinated campaign. they just tell friends misinformation they heard about vaccines or something they heard about voting machines or something like that. it doesn't mean they got it from top or someone was telling them to do that. should the platforms think about throttling that, just me talking to you, except it is clearly made up? >> is one of the tool stand for consider. if it's our proverbial crazy drunken uncle, maybe nothing happens to that. if it is a powerful politician with a megaphone of 50 million people, their words are completely different. holding that to a higher standard is fine. guidelines from congress and regulators are going to help leaders need to understand that those two are not the same. what you and i might say in the confines of our homes to a

couple of friends is completely different from what somebody says to 100 million people. caroline: how far can ai go at the moment? there has been an awful lot you hear about the amount of people they have working on this but the one artificial intelligence to pick out the most damaging misinformation and take it off-line as quickly as possible. how good is the ai getting and how quickly can it be enforced? >> i dealt with some of the hardest problems at scale. ai is not a magic answer to these and you run into the constraints joe is talking about -- if you are super accurate about -- at identifying what is illegal, you will sweep up regular content along with it. we need more data and we need to know if illegal content is shared on such and such platform, they can act on it within two minutes, or they will

delay it for 20 minutes while actual people look up this. we need to care about more than effort. need to have a shared understanding of the actual things that happen, actual results. in my mind just a we have 20,000 or 10,000 people doesn't let you are me know are they good at solving this problem. ai is part of the answer, but ai has more constraints than people want to talk about. joe: as an investor thinking about the competitive landscape protect, how do think about the difficulty in finding companies that compete directly with these gigantic firms? how much does that enter in to your competition, and do you think there is a competitive marketplace for the consumer and other things that interest you? >> it's pretty hard. investors understand that going head-to-head against very large companies is very problematic. on the other hand, enterprise

investing, there is a lot of that going on. in fact, i would say that one of the few pure consumer companies in the recent past, and that is because there is fear going head-to-head against billion-dollar companies is not a smart to make money. caroline: with the ceo and cofounder have on what is the data that you say yes you say you need more data to understand how good a job they are doing. what data could you get from these companies? >> when i speak about social media and data, and speaking of it more of what does the public and congress. -- needed to make better decisions how quickly these objectionable content brought out to him how much is subject to review before it is let

loose, what impact of algorithmic amplification on what objectionable content gets shared. we follow a different problem with a different set of principles and so this kind of data is less of a need in the context of mike being -- my being the ceo. caroline: but on that note come with they have gladly given that data, do you think? the bits of data that facebook could give to the body politic? >> every team that works on objectionable content has to grade itself internally in terms of how good a job they are doing. the metrics i'm talking about how quickly is objectionable content identified how much is set for human review, these are all things -- yes, the methodology will be different from company to company, but they have the data.

but there needs to be an amount of pressure to have this data come out in the open so we can actually make better decisions about what is the long-term section 230, what provision do we change from how good a job are we doing. joe: is that something that the industry should be more forthcoming with unilaterally, or is that something that every collator or legal -- a regulator or legal act could enforce? >> given the past four years -- we have been talking about this since the 2016 election -- i think it would take some kind of active regulation, fcc stepping up to do the job. it is going to require a certain amount of pressure before more of this information is available freely. caroline: really interesting perspective, thinking of google,

and now with greylock partners. great to have your time could we thank you. more on the fed's decision. this is bloomberg. ♪

caroline: the federal reserve stress tests of the big banks across the united states got all the more important. if you pass them, come end of june you will distribute evidence under the stock buybacks that were promised earlier in december. plenty of news digesting on the move from the federal reserve, we saw a little bit of gain after hours in the big bank stocks will joe: a lot of this wasn't anticipated and there was improvement, but we are seeing some after-hours gains.

now to talk about these steps in the relaxation of the crisis-period measures, who is the big winner from the policy announced? >> i think all of the big banks are going to be winners on this one because they have been pushing on the restrictions to be lifted. we heard throughout conference calls that the executives are saying, look, we are in good shape, we want to return money to shareholders and raise dividends as soon as the fed will let us. that is referent we have heard throughout the earnings calls. this is the industry getting what he pushed for and what it wanted. caroline: how political will this decision be as well? do you think there will be pushback? >> caroline come whenever there is anything related to buybacks there is criticism and pushback for some idle things is -- this

will be any different, given the politically charged environment and the fact that much of the economy is not doing well, and yet the banks seem to have weathered at crisis extremely well. they like to say they were very responsible stewards of capital, and that is why they were able to weather the crisis. but of course when it comes to the lyrical wind -- political winds surrounding banks, buybacks is always hotspot. joe: what kind of criticism are we going to see? we were talking to sonali earlier, and while the restriction is being removed, there are other things going on, concerns about the restriction moratorium, and the unemployment rate, for all the optimism about the economy, still very elevated . how much blowback do we expect or would you expect from the fed loosening up the rules on the banks with essentially the crisis still going on?

lananh: well, joe, we are only 25 minutes after the fed decision, but i expect when things like this happen, i expect comments from legislature ors and commentators pretty fast. i think there is been a lot of opposition to the banks increasing buybacks. some more progressive campaigners and advocates, and there is always a ton of scrutiny on banks when these things happen, particularly because of the conditions you mentioned. broadly in the economy things are bad, and a lot of people look to the banks as being sort of a key transmission mechanism for economic forces. if there are consumers that are struggling, that's always juxtaposed against the banks' results and what the banks do. i would expect that have a criticism to come pretty fast. caroline: how fast you expect

after the june lead up for the dividends to start rolling? we have the immediate premises in terms of share buybacks coming after the news coming they were lousy? lananh: yes, caroline, but tends to happen is the banks--what tends to happen is that the banks combine lawyers and we look at the language of the fed statement, if they have any additional questions about how this will be rolled out. it looks like the fed is saying it will revert back to its previous capital buffer regime, which is what the banks were pushing for. if it is fairly straightforward, i expect the banks already have plans for how they are going to raise dividends and roll out there share buyback plans. if there are details in there that might change things, that remains to be seen, but it looks to me like this is fairly straightforward. caroline: bloomberg's lananh nguyen on all things fed physician -- this time not on

rates, but the future of banks and the ability to pay dividends is we didn't get to talk nft's today. joe: plenty of days, many of days. caroline: watching at 4:00 a.m., for sure. joe: "bloomberg technology" is next. this is bloomberg. ♪

it's moving day. and while her friends are doing the heavy lifting, jess is busy moving her xfinity internet and tv services. it only takes about a minute. wait, a minute? but what have you been doing for the last two hours? ...delegating? oh, good one. move your xfinity services without breaking a sweat. xfinity makes moving easy. go online to transfer your services in about a minute. get started today.

emily: i am emily chang in san francisco. this is "bloomberg technology." coming up, tech ceos under fire. facebook, google, and twitter and the hot seat at a house hearing on misinformation. we will speak with one congresswoman, who asked very pointed questions.