idea. but nonetheless, feminists have clearly affected conservative goals about promoting women in politics. and these conservative woman so heartily promoting a woman's bid for vice president have validated the claim of feminists for a long time, that women belong in the public sphere. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. what we will do now is our respondent, deirdre english, will have a response and a bit of a conversation with ronnie schreiber. and for the last 15 minutes we will open up to the floor for questions.

christine processed -- christine trust will have a microphone and will be able to ask questions of the panel. >> thank you very much. i'm deirdre english. i cannot claim to the same level of neutrality and objectivity that professor schrieber brought to this work. i have debated in the past, and not entirely successfully. she was very good. and i have written critically about conservative women in the past. but i have also gone as a journalist with great interest to alaska, to sarah palin's hometown, with something in the spirit that you brought to your work, to try to understand her religion, her neighbors, and her background. and i really appreciate your scholarship, and i appreciate the effort made to try to understand, to see to understand and then to be understood.

i think it is a good principle. i appreciate the respect you brought for your subjects and your own open-mindedness and you're pointing out their importance for social science as well as politics. i think you have established, if there was any doubt, that they are far from being mere mouthpieces for men. these are women who are speaking for themselves. they are passionately defending their believes, which are important to them. you remained an objective scholar in describing their

thinking, and the changes in their thinking that you observed. and that may, indeed, lead to greater sympathy and understanding between the two tribes. today, you focus on a great irony that of all things, in retrospect, sarah palin and michele bachmann have become iconic figures of women who can do it all. in sarah palin's case, having five children, choosing to have a down's syndrome baby while she was governor of alaska, and becoming with her husband and her own parents, active grandparents, sheltering her pregnant unwed daughter, bristol, while running for vice president. palin can actually kill a moose, and she has an amazing ongoing presence as a media star.

she may well in all fairness be in the running for super women superwoman of the past decade. but wait. it's the conservative women's movement, as you pointed out, that has classically blamed feminism for promulgating the idea that women can do it all. who is selling the idea now? what could phyllis schlafly have to say to sarah palin, since schlafly blames women's studies professors for failing to teach mothers to prioritize staying home over working? let me comment on this notion right away. and let's not just let it escape as a sign of progress. it is a mistaken stereotype of what feminism stands for, or ever has. from the very beginning, feminists saw that women were being swept into the modern workplace by the demands of a modern capitalist economy. but first, women were restricted

to the pink collar ghetto -- saleswomen, secretaries, nurses. and it was feminists who insisted that women can do professional work and hold authority. they broke open the law schools, the employment ads, the medical schools, and not to ignore the journalism schools, and many other institutions. they clearly saw from the beginning that women would not be able to do it all, and they asked society to provide for child care, family leave, flex time, and all services that other a dance capitalist countries do offer. for another thing, they asked men to become more active in raising their children. today, studies show that when men are better fathers, families are much happier. and working families have smaller families today and are

putting in more time nurturing and educating each tile than ever before in history, even compared to full-time housewives of only a few decades ago. so the conservative women who say that it is feminists who have tried to get women to do it all without support have got their facts wrong. feminist asked for social support. they asked for men's support. they did not get everything that they asked for, and that is the status quo today. a second irony, perhaps from a feminist point of view, is that had sarah palin and michele bachmann actually succeeded in achieving positions of power, they would have furthered legislation that dan would have denied women the resources to be able to do it all themselves. conservatives are not being terribly logical when they criticize feminists for trying to achieve higher office. it is an easy charge to dismiss.

why would we support women who would further policies that would demand that women who could not do it all themselves would not be given support, women who would oppose government or workplace accommodations for women who are not in such privileged positions with regard to their family resources? when you talk about this -- and i think you did raise this point, professor schreiber -- there is a need for historical and economic perspective. this debate has been with us throughout american history. it is not new. in the case of women's rights, there were liberal women who agitated for the vote at the time of the american revolution, just as there have been conservatives who oppose the

women's vote even into the 20th century. this is a very old debate that we have been conducting. and it has held us stymied in so many ways. i want to talk about this more when we get into the question- and-answer time frame, this gridlock of how long we have to remain in this quarell without making a lot of progress. how long have we been divided? the premodern era was governed by systems that were patriarchal. it wasn't feminism, but capitalism that overthrew patriarchy, disrupting father dominated productive households and sweeping man and later women into paid labor.

we are still in a transition away from patriarchy and into a world of rapid change that conservatives cannot halt any more than liberals can. the political question is, how can we find ways of modern life that offer the most benefit to all americans of all classes and races? and in all parts of the country. this is where i'm often puzzled by conservative rhetoric on the concept of privacy and choice. the state does not force the woman to divorce, to use contraception, to be a lesbian, or to have an abortion, but leaves this to her individual conscience where the laws allow. why then do conservatives believe that the state should have a right to force her not to marry a woman, not to use contraception, not to have a legal regulated abortion? i ask conservatives, why not

keep government out of our private lives and leave it to a woman's religion, moral beliefs, and conscience? conservatives seek to restrict the choices of nonconservative women, which is a style that reaches back to patriarchal attitudes rather than to current ideals of personal freedom and self responsibility. this is one place where i perceive a much bigger contradiction in conservative thinking than whether or not a woman should wear lipstick. one might ask -- is this merely a squabble? this american history long argument, is this merely a squabble among women that men can ignore? i don't think so. we are actually talking about how to organize our

civilization. who has children and how many, the way the sexes relate, whether or not heterosexuality should be the only norm, who will get an education, who will be a leader, whether talented people can rise in a meritocracy without being disqualified by gender, who will care for the sick and the elderly, who will be financially supported -- when and how? these are such fundamental issues that we are talking about, that they get to the core of the lace we live as americans and what the american dream really is. they are not really women's issues, but matters that touch on all of our lives. and men can and do care about these issues. in fact, i would venture to say

that this is really not a split between conservative women versus feminist woman, but rather between conservatives than liberals generally. after all, today more than ever, most liberal men agree with liberal women on these issues, and conservative men and women agree with each other. i think it is interesting to note that in the early feminist movement, many feminists did construct this battle as one of women against men, women generally being oppressed by men generally. but perhaps, feminists have changed, much as you think that conservative women have changed in a way that we have not always noticed. because today, you will find much more that feminists see

this not as a battle among women, or as between women and men, but really a battle between liberals, liberal men and women together, versus conservatives, men and women together. i think you have raised the important question of common ground. and you have shown that though defending conservative ideas, the women you have studied have also been actively expanding roles for women. this is a huge paradox. and you have argued that it leads them to some common ground with liberals. indeed, i think we can propose a superwoman of our own to enter that common ground. i cannot think of a better one than nancy pelosi. she is a liberal feminist superwoman, who was a devout catholic, a long-term marriage,

has raised a large family. she, like sarah palin, also enjoys showing off her children and grandkids on the public stage, as if to say woman can have it all, perhaps in different stages. yet ideologically, nancy pelosi does not expect a single working class woman to provide for all of her own needs. she supports a variety of life options for all women and trust them to make individual decisions without big daddy government telling them what they can and cannot do. government in her hands is conceived of as a resource and a support four women and children, not a disciplinarian. if we expect women who do not have money or perfectly enabling families to be in the workforce, we must do this, provide this for them, or we are sacrificing the welfare of their children. nancy pelosi is, perhaps from the liberal side, an example of what you have described, feminine toughness.

she is feminine. and sure, she is tough. you have to be to be in politics. but not ideologically conservative in her consumption of government. conservatives do not have a lock on those trades. one thing nancy pelosi would never do in contrast to those women you promote it is attacked janet reno, and others. she would never criticize a woman in public office for her looks. if that is what conservatives propose, i will have to say, no thank you. so let's continue, as you have pioneered, to learn about the principles that conservative women stand for and how they are evolving. let's perhaps look more at how

liberal or feminist ideas have also evolved and changed. and perhaps, we are letting some of that slip out of view. and let's expand the arena of conversation, by all means. only if we talk to each other can we correct stereotypes and incorrect ideas we have about each other. misunderstandings only make matters worse. let's continue to eliminate them, and let's try to get to what the real issues are. thank you. [applause] >> now i'm sure people have many questions. i would like to open the floor to those questions. let me begin by asking you a

little bit about how conservative women felt. you said that they felt they were stereotyped by feminist women. what did they feel were the worst stereotypes that feminists had about them? >> essentially, that they only focused on being a stay-at-home mothers and that they had no other goals or desires to be actively involved in politics. whereas feminists, basically, i think, ignore their contributions to politics. that was the biggest concern they had with feminists, in terms of how feminist perceive them. they had a lot of concerns about feminists, sort of broadly speaking.

as i noted, they articulate that feminists have promoted ideologies that are kind of premised on man hating and are anti-feminine, and so on and so forth. but mostly that feminists have undervalued their contributions to politics. >> would you be able to comment at all about what you felt their stereotypes of feminists were? >> sure. this is where i thought it was wonderful to do this as a researcher. it is also very frustrating to do this as a researcher. he cut the stereotypes they come out -- i'm just recording and saying yes and so on, but i really want to engage in a dialogue. and say, well, i have to say that -- i want to push them on it and say, i'm a feminist and i

know women who are feminists and they don't fit that stereotype. let's talk about why we have the stereotypes and so on. i will give an example. when i interviewed phyllis schlafly, she said to me, feminists are opposed to marriage and children. i am a married feminist with children. i have heard her say this before. she has written this. i wanted to push her on this. i said, what would you say to a woman who is married, like in gandy, who runs the national organization for women who i also interviewed for my book. she has children. what would you say to her? what she said was, what i meant to say was that feminist promote

policies that are anti-family. but basically, that feminists are anti-children, anti- marriage, and so on. >> the institute for study is for liberal feminist women? >> i did a lot of research. i came to this project because actually, my original spark for this idea was in college. i was in pennsylvania. it was one of the state that was going down. there was a big debate about it. and it really was about feminists and feminism in politics, generally speaking. there were some exceptions. there was a lot of attention to diversity among women, but not a lot of attention to ideological diversity among women. there is a lot of scholarship on them liberal feminism, but not on conservative women. >> what about conservative women in terms of class. did you look at that?

>> i did not for this so far. there are surveys. i will eventually incorporate that into my research. but for now, certainly, the woman that i interviewed and the organizations that i'm studying our women from upper income or higher class. i don't like that term. upper income families, generally speaking. there is not a lot of discussion about last diversity among these women. the lack of support for things like federally funded childcare speak to that as well. >> which might be to them equated with paying more taxes. >> absolutely. they believe that -- it is not like we should ignore the problems. but they do believe that the best approach is to have flex time in the workplace, maybe

provide tax incentives to businesses to offer these kinds of things. >> you offered to say a little bit more about the two different strains of conservativism and the two different organizations. would you say a little bit more about the differences between conservative women? >> yes, absolutely. the independent women's forum was founded by a woman who originally founded a group called the woman for judge thomas. after they were successful, they decided to found an organization. they do not take a position on abortion or same-sex marriage. they really focus on what they consider to be economic policies, government regulation of businesses, and so on. they talk about how those policies either affect women or women's perspective on them. concerned women for america is what i would call a socially

conservative group. they mostly deal with issues having to do with abortion and issues of "morality." same-sex marriage, pornography, and so on. there has been some great work on this by sarah dunn and others, about the way the conservative politics have managed to fuse the two. they do not always work together, but some of these groups managed to put out coherent messages, even though the independent women's forum does not deal with issues like abortion. >> what happens to a conservative woman who really believes an individual right and perhaps once very limited government, but also really believes in keeping -- it does believe in abortion rights? >> i interviewed several of them. >> are they without an organization? >> i think, without power, perhaps. you hear this now from some of the more moderate republican woman in office. >> i raise that question is a contradiction that i see. there is a contradiction between wanting less government, yet

more government restrictions on personal decisions. and on private life. that does seem like a big contradiction. a conservative woman who would make that decision to resolve that contradiction in favor of freedom, individual rights, and privacy. >> i think that is true, and i think they feel like for now the republican party is welcoming enough, in terms of economic policies and so on, and i'll be abortion part, they are holding their nose. and there are pro-choice republican women in office. those are the women who are growing more frustrated with the emphasis on republican party antiabortion policy. but i think it is not clean. there are certain contradictions, i agree, but they don't believe the

democratic party represents the things they are most concerned with. yes, they are as pro-choice and so on, but in terms of what the government should be doing economically, they still feel more comfortable in the republican party and that is what they choose to focus on. >> i want to ask you one very fundamental question, which is, is there a really any benefit to finding more common ground? we have been talking as though there is. and on some level, there seems to be an idea that needs no defense, but would it make it a difference clinically to find more common ground? >> i think there are some places where it would. the one area that i think women should work together and cross ideological lines is in media sexism. there is no reason there needs to be a divide among women

ideologically about how media, particularly media coverage of women running for office or in office, there is no reason there needs to be an ideological divide in terms of assessing or evaluating that. there is a group that has formed recently called "name it, change it" and they are coming out everywhere. you are hindering their promotion in politics because of it. that would be one area. >> i would love to understand more about how your guilty about stereotypes conservatives about feminists, feminists about conservatives. >> there are is certainly a role

in that. and in terms of who the media and i thinkpeak it's changing slightly now. they have done a good job of getting themselves on television and representing conservatives. they see that in terms of a novelty point. is ank the other area little challenging. like i said earlier, there are women and then there is the ideological divide. there are organizations that are nonpartisan promoting women but they do run into some challenges andthey are promoting women a maybe feminist or vice versa. whetherchallenges about or not you're a woman or acting

in my interest. >> thank you very much. let's open this up for questions people are eager to ask. >> in the conservative view, feminist women not supporting feminist candidates, did you ask them if they support liberal women candidates, because they are women? >> absolutely. >> and what was their response? >> this is changing, and this is one of the things i have talked about, but it has never been an explicit goal of conservative women's group to get women in elected positions of power until recently, which really started with sarah palin, but it has been a goal of feminist organizations, and i know you were saying that they would not support palin, and i think that is true, but it does require them to be more specific in terms of what they care about in

promoting women and electing women in office, so they do not see it as contradictory. it has been a stated goal for them to get more women in elected office, and so it really was not a problem for them. it is just a question. >> what about ethnic diversity? >> right. again, i will not -- to state that organizations and the women that i work with and study, you do not get a ton of diversity. there is some diversity among my interviewees, more age diversity, and i have one who is 89, and i have also interviewed some college women activist to get some perspective, so it was interesting for me to get some perspective there. there is some ethnic and racial diversity, but not a lot. what i am calling the elite level, in terms of surveys, people who identify as

conservative, or so on, there is a bit more difference there. >> so the feminine toughness frame that you're talking about is not, the feminine part of it is not new at all, because we go back into the 1900s, and people were using their femininity or their roles as mothers to support their political stances, because we have this view that men do not have, and that is held in politics. we are for peace, because we know about the men and children, and when women for peace was an act in congress, they brought their children and, and they are very interested to show that they were traditionally feminine, so it is not new. it is like these women are 100 years behind the times, and they are not offering something that is strikingly new to politics, so that rings me to my question, and your claiming that this has cultural significance and is

transforming conservative values. i do not see how they are contributing to the conservative or transforming, really, the conservative agenda in the way that some people may point you in the democratic party, so i am actually interested in the impact of these women in the party at large. >> briefly, i do not know that these women, that it is new or they are necessarily behind the times, per se. you are right about the internalists strategies, and that was both sides. it is not really you for conservative women either. it is just the way they have been doing it for women in an office. in terms of shifting or having an impact on the republican party, i think that just the more women who are -- studies -- currently, republican women do not fare well when they do in primaries, in part because people think they are too liberal, though there is an idea

that some may be more feminist, so from the perspective of the republican party, the more conservative women you have out there running for office and making these claims, you may help republican women run for office, because it was shipped the idea that you do not have to be a man to be a conservative, which helps republican party. i think that is incredibly important for them, and the other thing is there is a gender gap, and the gender gap i am talking about is that women as a whole, and it is not just gender, racism is a factor, preferred democrat candidates, particularly in the elections, and to the extent you can get more women running for office and more conservative women out there and being lyrically active, i think you may have some impact on that, a little bit, and, again, this is from the perspective of the party. the final piece of this is part of the reason it is a relatively low number of republican women

in office is the republican party has not done a particularly good job of recruiting and training and promoting republican women for office, so the more the leaders say this is a problem, i think that would have impact on the way the republican party deals with candidates. >> well, thank you. thank you, especially, professor schreiber, for your comments. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> this weekend on "newsmakers," am and heritage action for america.

it was founded in 2010 and made defending the healthcare lots first key issue. with the group as plans for 2014 as well as his own thoughts regarding divisions in the republican party. here's a preview. clinics we need to modernize our immigration system. we welcome people from all around the world to come to this country, to contribute. you only get one chance to do bold immigration reform. there are all sorts of problems that needs to be looked at. it has demonstrated the face and how they want to use this issue for political means and not forgetting good policy. we can all agree that we need to increase the number of h-1b

visas. why did they not want to put forward that bill? they passed a bill in the house to do it. that should be something we agreed to settle on. i support a guest worker program. we should've a programmer people can come in the, war, then go home. once you start fixing the imbalance that currently exist, you build trust with the american people and there may be a time in the future where you then say now that we fix the system, what do we do about the people that are here now. >> this would keep the amnesty or anything related to amnesty off to the side? >> it depends. with the president going forward, he's been pretty clear. it does include some kind of amnesty. whatere was good faith,

ould we do to fix the system? >> you are on record saying you don't think there will be any overturning of obamacare until 2017. you think a bigger fix for lobby possible until after this president is out. >> a modern immigration system would include a guest worker program. guestworkers don't sign up for labor unions. >> watch more of the interview needham tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern and 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. to congress and what to expect next week when lawmakers return from their winter break, beginning the week considering a three-month extension of long-term unemployment insurance which

ended last month and that will be the first item on the agenda when they gaveled back in on sunday. also scheduled, a final vote on the nomination of janet yellen to be the chair of the federal reserve and the house returns tuesday for a pro forma session. no legislative businesses scheduled that day. on two will likely vote bills related to the healthcare law, one to monitor the implementation and the other to protect personal information on the health care.gov website. watch the house on c- span and the senate on c-span 2. >> managing editor of "the hill." they return monday to look at a bill that would extend unemployment insurance. who was sponsoring this bill? how long is the extension? what is the likelihood it will get past the?

>> there is a republican from nevada and a democrat from rhode island you have joined to extend this. has not been any additional republican sport that has come out just yet. harry reid strongly supports it. he first has to get the vote. it remains to be seen if they will get the votes. >> there's a boat coming up at 534 janet yellen to be the next chair of the federal reserve. where is her support coming from in the senate? in the so- changes called nuclear option effect this vote? >> she does have the vote. for they went on break, there was a procedural vote and she got 59 votes and it has cleared the way for this final vote. this is with the nuclear option

put into effect. she did not need the 60 but a majority. she got 59 and a procedural motion is expected to pass. in committee, there is only one democrat, joe manchin, who voted no. mixture of votes here. most will certainly support rim there will be some republicans that back. >> the houses back with at least one vote on the healthcare law. how is this different than others have taken on health care >> this is different because it billt an obamacare repeal that we've seen dozens of times from house republicans. this bill would mandate that the federal government tell those whose data has been breached or there has been some problem with signing up, they say there is

no one security or private information that has been breached. held hearings on this. they have heard testimony and say the security of the site is not strong. they are very outspoken on this including mike rogers from michigan. >> gaining a new member and one is leaving. byrne will be replacing jo bonner his steps aside. a special election and he won the general election after congress had adjourned so that's why he has not and sworn in. last day will officially be january 6. he's been cleared to join the shf a housing agency. that was a nomination that really needed the nuclear option because he did not have the necessary votes to be able to clear but after the nuclear option was deployed, he was

confirmed and there will be a special election for his race once he steps down. we are not sure when it will happen just yet. looking athe scenes, a spending bill to keep the government operating after the continuing resolution expires january 15. what's the status? >> they been working over the holidays to put in language that would keep funding the government facing a january 15 deadline. the spending level is just over $1 trillion that was agreed to murray deal. now they have to pass an appropriation bill that curries enough favor with republicans and democrats. fund the government in a massive omnibus and doubled a question of when they come out with that bill. does it have the votes to pass? which showed a but we will see. >> anything else we should look

at with the second session getting underway? >> immigration will be a big issue certainly in the first few months of the year. some are concerned that speaker john boehner will move some type of immigration bill. mccainhire a former john aid. it remains to be seen what will happening there and remains to be seen what he will do on the extension of unemployment benefits. we are in an election year so we will see that more as it goes on. >> you can find his work atthehi hill.comthe >> we bring public affairs events directly to you putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, conferences offering complete devil to gavel coverage of the u.s. house all as a spanate industry of c-

created by the cable industry's 34 years ago and provided by your local cable or satellite provider. now you can watch us in hd. rolediscussion about the of conservative women in today's politics. before that, segments from the tech trend should disrupt conference, an annual event focused on technology and some of the latest devices. first, the ceo's of linkedin and twitter talking about their companies and how they are managed. ♪ >> i am of techcrunch and joining me is the ceo of linkedin who has led us through a successful ipo. jeff weiner. he has been impressing wall street ever since.

first tell us what is happening at linkedin right now. late last year, it sounds like it is going beyond recruiting. what is the economic draft? >> we have a professional graph at maps up to three degrees and hope to get your foot in the door. your company's have better leverage. but our longer-term vision is much bigger than that. you have developed the first economic graph. as they want to represent every economic opportunity full-time and part-time. >> a job? >> a job, for example. they are fragmented.

with the launch recently of our university profiled capabilities, we would like there to be a profile representing the higher educational representation. over 3 billion people in the global workforce and we would like to ultimately overlay the professionally relevant knowledge for each of those individual companies and universities to the extent they would like to share it. our goal is to get out of the way and allow those notes to create work value and capital. working capital, human capital.

in doing so, we hope to play a role in transforming the global economy. >> what is the mindset for a small business? let's say a small mom-and-pop store in california. >> it is challenging for small businesses to compete with larger companies within certain communities for talent. or that small business to have a profile and represent their talent brand, why it would be great to work at that business. their mission and their culture and how to make a difference within their community for people to connect with that company. for whom it makes sense. >> literally, you can do a

search for a company within a specific geography. that company profile that emerges shows relevant results. there will be a tab on that profile car courier's. on that career cap, the founders of those businesses will have an opportunity to show the world what they are all about with the same easy and facilitate you have seen large enterprises do. >> what you need to do for linkedin to get there? >> the beauty is that we are down that path. >> what you are describing describes linkedin in a lot of ways. >> it is much more than job openings. the company row file page and the knowledge and intelligence and information data in the insight of the profile for every individual that would like to find work, it goes beyond jobs. it is also about making sure that people in jobs have access to the right knowledge they need

to do great at the work they are doing. in terms of what we do, everything i mention that i reference is up and running. we are fast approaching -- there is a lot of work that has been done to lay the foundation to make is a reality. >> what is the next step? >> continue to scale it and invest in every one of those dimensions. we have been talking about professional knowledge post up continue to improve our homepage experience which is generating billions of updates on a weekly racist, each of which is customized for the individual member and who they are and their skills and their ambition and their connections and ambitions, etc. linkedin today is a personalized trade magazine for individuals >> what about the software? there are rumors.

>> sales force is a partner today. >> what about in five years? >> i think it will continue to be a partner of ours. they facilitate what we call social selling. it enables a salesperson or professional to leverage their network and ultimately convert what would have been a cold call into a warm prospect. >> tell me a little bit about your process. in-house you build something or tools for your company to use. if you liked it well enough, you would push it out to the public. tell me what you're working on in this area. >> i think you're referring specifically to how we at linkedin is leveraging it as a platform to generate value for our employees. it is important to draw

distinctions between what historically has been public professional network, which is what linkedin is. most of is publicly available by design. there is a private professional network of which you will increasingly see within the enterprise. there is sensitive, competitive situation. at linkedin, we are building tools allow us to collect values from our own platform. we want to have the right kind of engagement and productivity enhancement. >> it sounds like a type of interface. >> we wanted to be specific and unique to what we offer today. we have professional identity, for example. again, no definitive plans to offer that as a product. >> who do you consider a competitor for the economic graph?

people like to reference facebook. occasionally they will do some sort of professional up a delegate people buzzing. so far, it is a broader layer. who else is doing that? >> there is no company right now that has the professional focus at the scale that we do. that doesn't mean that we are not focused on the competitive landscape and future competitors and current competitors. there are other social platforms that operate with a far greater horizontal focus and a third- party developer. it can serve our members and customers well. 80%+ of members are reinforcing that we keep the professional

and personal lives separate. we will continue to keep an i out for future competitors. >> google and google plus? >> if there are any search engines that decide to focus within a professional context, that could introduce a new dynamic. as a result of focus, we can create relevancy and value. to your point earlier, large companies are going to be thinking about how they leverage social assets and platforms to make things more productive and successful. >> tell me more about your plans. from afar, it is hard for me to tell if you are trying to make linkedin into a sort of bloomberg type where you have news on top of your professional network. you haven't described it quite that way.

where do you see linkedin going and content properties? >> the objective is to be the definitive professional platform. we make it easy for publishers and anyone who wants to share content to do so. for membership, they can cap that intelligence to do better at the job they are in. there has been a big move in that direction. historically, there were some people that would have said linkedin is a way to get a job. with the launch of influencers and people like richard branson being followed by more than 2 million of our members, sharing information on how to become an entrepreneur and how to build the company, he is not alone.

>> you provide personal philosophies for people? >> if they were to offer original content -- we are lucky to have a guy who has built a wonderful group that helps curate our sites. it is not at the exclusion of the social conductivity and that dynamics that allow us to generate a signal. it is taking the best of all of those disciplines to great the best experience. >> you are looking at a medium instead of a competitor these days? >> a medium is -- there are a lot of contents in the world. you package up the most relevant content you can find. >> are used to working on your developer platform? i know you launched a few versions of that. and that is fairly constrictive compared to other platforms. still pushing that with

developers? >> we are. roughly 1,000 with keys to the api. >> salesforce is one of the better examples? >> salesforce. there are millions of unique domains. we are working with publishers like yourself. >> in terms of sharing data to others, are you looking at doing anything more along those lines? where are you focused more on as a content publisher company? >> we are investing heavily in mobility and with these apis, we don't want people tethered to the desktop to get a platform. >> students have benefited quite a bit that people without work or suddenly needing to go out and buy new jobs. linkedin is a natural way for them to do that. what are the trends you're

seeing in the workplace? what industries are growing? >> i think there are a few trends. we have seen consistent patterns where the technology sector, financial services has regained some of its footing. health care is a high-growth industry. in terms of broader -- i do not think that is going away anytime soon. people are taking temporary work whether they want to. or because the longer-term, full-time opportunities do not exist. probably one of the most important dynamics that we track is the skills gap in the

widening skills gap. a lot of people do not realize where unemployment is roughly at 7.5%, there's over 3.8 million available jobs today in the u.s. one of the things that has happened is opportunities are being created by virtue of new technologies. but technologies are evolving so rapidly that it is challenging to train people to keep up with the technology that is being created. >> a lot of jobs are being automated and will not come back. it is not -- the growth of new jobs is not equal to the loss of jobs. a lot of people are wondering where their place is in the

do i have to be an engineer or a data scientist to get a job? >> roughly two thirds of those our non-technical in major. looking at the resurgence of the economy in a city like new york mayor bloomberg was the first to tell you they have created 300% more jobs than they lost during the recession following 2008. a good chunk of those -- hospitality, instruction -- are starting to come back online and create jobs. also with regards to technology, there are hybrid sects. companies like uber and airbnb there certainly economic value that is being added. >> where do you see that going? i know there are right spots and technology, but there are losses

in a lot of areas. how do you see this evolving? you are building your business around that evolution. >> there are three things we need to invest in. first, education. it is not just primary school. it will take at least a generation to improve and make sure we do not have an antiquated system that is preparing kids for jobs that once were instead of the jobs that will be. you have to have an adaptive learning platform. also with regard to education, with that love to see greater focus on vocational things. there are jobs that exist today. we can make sure that the current workforce is better trained to take the jobs that exist -- there are a lot of retail jobs. to be can do better job with vocational training and make sure we are not just innovating when it comes to hire educating him about vocational, that will

have an immediate term impact. immigration reform is critical. there are people born outside this country that have unique skills to take the jobs that are available that are going unfilled. as a result, salaries are not being paid. tax revenues not being >> what is it that you're seeing? >> at on think immigration reform is one thing or another. . you also have situations where in silicon valley, engineering jobs, data sciences jobs, jobs with significant skills are required, these jobs are going unfilled at times because the

bar for allowing people born outside of this country to work inside this country are too high. fortune 500 was founded by immigrants and the .hildren of any immigrants >> in terms of going over the topic we were going over earlier, we have seen sites where over the last years people are doing their work online, sharing their work online and hiring and firing each other based on their online work. that is all happening within these professional communities. it ties in with linked in a little bit but it is not linked in has.

how would you see yourself fitting into that world? >> we referred to that dynamic as inferred identity. your showcasing your work. whether it is a portfolio of your artistry or whatever. we are starting to evolve the profiles. it is not tech based like a resume but more of a portfolio. you get a chance to showcase various information. the stories you have written, the photographs you have taken. >> what might that look like in the future for linkedin? will it be integrated with the

other sites, synced with my linkedin profile? >> the ability to log in with linkedin is something we have invested in. we continue to see good traction there. going back to something we talked about, our goal to enable our members to generate value no matter where there are, not just on linkedin.com. if that can include taking elements of the professional identity wherever they are going, we would love to make that possible. >> great. thank you so much for your time. give him a big hand, everybody. [applause] ♪ >> our next guest created a unique management style that he teaches in course form for his employees.

please welcome the twitter ceo, dick costolo. >> what's happening? thank you for having me here. i love coming and talking to groups like this. you guys are the most fun. you are at the most fun stage of the company. whether it is just a few of you and everything is possible and there are no barnacles on the organization or the product. you are up all night. you are the ceo and buying printer paper and all of that stuff. amazing time for the company. it is an why do i want to come here and talk to you now for a few minutes right before lunch about how to lead when there are two or three of you and you're looking at each other. why is that important? the reason it is important is becausethe reason it is

important is, because even at this stage as you go from two people to -- if you don't deal with these things, dysfunction becomes embedded in your company. dysfunction becomes learned and part of the culture of the company and it is almost impossible to eradicate it. i will talk about two specific i want you to take away today about how to manage and how to lead in your company. paradox, and it is the ultimate paradox of being a manager or a leader. it is quite simply this. as a leader, you need to care deeply, deeply about your people while not worrying or caring about what they think about you. managing by trying to be like is the path to ruin. that is easy to say and think.

like, yeah, i do that. the reality is there are all i am very direct with people. the reality is there are all these little ways that managing by trying to be liked or telling people what they want to hear creeps into the organization. you will walk down the hall and talk to your cofounder about something they did that annoyed you the other day or that they did to that need to change. you think they are busy. they look like they are having a rough morning. i will talk to them tomorrow about it. or you are trying to create some award, and it is between two people and the way you deal is instead of getting them in the room and talking about the fact that we have to do this and i need you to do this, you tell them, hey, we need to do this. you tell the two people to different things. you go to the first person and say hey we need to go do this thing.

and you call a second person in the room and say, listen, nobody wants you to do this more than i do but right now i have to let this other person do it very but don't worry you will get the next thing. don't lead that way. lead by being forthright. the way you build trust with your team and the people is by being forthright and clear with them from day one. communicating with them based on -- i hopeot based on they perceive this in a positive way and i hope they leave the room with me feeling good. that is the most important management tip i can give you. it is an understanding of that paradox and how important it is to care so deeply about your team and not worrying about what they think about you. second thing i will tell you, it is critical here in san francisco and silicon valley --

there are many different ways to be successful. ok? the problem in san francisco and silicon valley is, we lionize people and set them up to the amazing leaders and geniuses. books are written about them. they show us how to do things the way they do it. they are constantly on tv and in the media. when things are going really really well and this is how this person does this thing. this is why they do it this way. take notes and we feverishly try to imitate what they have done to be successful. the reality is these people are the same people they were 10 years ago and are going to be. the person they are today may be frowned upon 10 years from now are was frowned upon 10 years earlier. it is critical as you great your

-- as you try to create your company and your cultures that you absolutely internalize this fact. there are many different ways to be successful. i was having a conversation with the ceo of pinterest. then said all these people out here who are leaders, there is this superpower that has enabled them to do amazing things. they are all different. i thought that was an amazing insight. when i tell you and implore you to find your own means of being successful and understand there are many different ways to be successful, i will frame it in his language. find your individual superpower and leverage that. be successful in your own way.

if you manage by deep caring about your people while not worrying about what they think about you, you will be a successful -- as successful as you can possibly be. always remember when you are thinking about communicating clearly with people, you may think people are fooled if you're telling them what they want to hear -- they are looking at you all the time. if you try to lead in some way that is not true to who you are, they can see it. they will see through it. you will lose the trust of the team. it is those simple pieces of advice of how to lead. have a great lunch. [applause] ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

♪ >> more now from the techcrunch disrupt conference and seven cisco with engineers and executives from silicon valley discussing the latest in droids and robotic technology. this portion is 25 minutes. ♪ >> we are going to talk about robots. but first we are going to do something a little bit fun. who here remembers tocco copter? copter? copter?

it doesn't exist. it's just a dream until today. are we getting video? here it comes. >> slightly terrified. [applause] now that the tough part is out of the way, what we are going to talk about, everybody probably has an idea in their head about a robot from science fiction like c3p0 the jetsons made. that's all we're going to talk about. we are going to talk about robots that don't look like your traditional robots. it might even be a thermostat. we will start with those science fiction robots and have you tell us your favorite. >> my favorite robot is kitt

from "knight rider." >> mine is c3po. >> i have to go with wall-e. such a good personality. >> rob, you helped us come up with the idea for this panel. for waysus some ideas to think what do you think on about this subject. the other side is the boundary between what makes a robot a robot versus a hardware? >> a lot of people think of robotics as humanoid robot that can move around. the definition i think of and we think of is something that can sense your surroundings, but the device can be absolutely anything. think about an enchanted object and that's what i think about as a robot.

>> that is good. with that definition in mind, we want the other 3 guys to convince us that what you are working on is a robot or has robot like qualities. >> robotics is about making his ill things come to life and using software to define them to do fascinating things. for us, we are starting with entertainment. it is a fantastic place to start and we are making physical characters understand their surrounding, they understand what they are they react to each other, doing and they come to life to make experiences possible in the physical world that have never been possible before. that's our first incarnation of technology in people's living rooms. >> for us, it's a little

different because we have a different challenge. we build uav's and make them as close as possible to a helicopter without a pilot in it. a lot of the work that we put in is software to make these guys really smart. to go to certain locations, do things, come back. completely autonomously. >> when you build a device that is intelligent, where does that come from? for us it comes from the from the deep understanding of learning. from the beginning, we knew we had to build a machine that would learn from you. we actually built a team like we would have done, we hired a lot of our old colleagues from carnegie mellon, one of them being our old professor to build a thermostat. we knew that intelligence had to be in the dna of the company. >> when you're recruiting these people, did you realize these

guys were expert in robotics, was it a hard sell? >> it was a really easy sell. once you hear the idea like do a thermostat, first you think i'm nuts. then you realize how big the problem is. everyone has them. they haven't been replaced in 20 years. they are wasting energy, horrible design issues, it becomes a pretty obvious problem. for robotists, there's sensors and environment changes. >> you have one or multiple nest thermometers at home? >> i do. >> to boil down what the value proposition is, how would you say that has changed your home life? >> i don't need to worry about what my home is doing when i'm away. when i leave, i'm confident the temperature will turn down and not run my air conditioning all day. if i go out for a business trip or i'm in the office it turns down automatically. in california, the weather is fortunately mild but for the , rest of the country, that is a problem and a waste of time of energy that

way. -- they waste a lot of time and energy that way. >> let's talk about drones. did you feel confident? >> 100%. i was a little nervous. there a lot of people here. >> that would have been really hard. >> you talked a little bit about what sky catch is doing. talk about how it is different from other drone companies. >> absolutely. where different in the sense that we focus on working with really large companies and the implementation, rather than having somebody with a remote control, gathering information. we can deploy hundreds of thousands of these and we do it all using very high tech technology for keeping a drone in the air. >> you are mostly building this for industrial reasons?

>> that's correct. we are focusing on companies in the areas of construction, mining, agriculture, wind turbines, solar panels, that's the range we work with. >> let me ask you maybe a slightly tougher question, something somebody tweeted at me and i would be interested in getting other people's take on this -- as we move into an industrial context, you think these are going to put people out of work? >> personally, i think is going to augment our ability to make better decisions. not necessarily replace people, but for instance we did a test in napa valley with uc davis and we had a farmer there was very skeptical about this. in fact, he said i'm not going to use this and when he finally got him to test it out, his reaction was like a little kid.

we don't know anything about we saw everything, but farming. he was able to make decisions right away. >> do think that is going to be universally true? do you think the existing world forces going to change? >> we have never had this data set before. just like we never had google maps. one of our team members said this is google maps in real time with more high definition. for management, security, for fulfilling resources when you run out of sand or panels. you can act really quickly. without using the phone. >> i imagine the initial project is not competitive with human labor.

i know that there is something we can talk about, but do you think there is potential for competition from a labor perspective? >> a lot of robotics are actually additive. it's not that somebody was -- people have been playing toys and games forever, it is just now we are making the first videogame in the real world. it does not replace someone whose experiences are better. it just makes the overall efficiency that much higher. >> again, you talked a little bit about the technology already, but you were on stage at apple's last big event. how many people saw that? the world of racecars? at first it was just like these

guys have racecars, whatever, but in terms of what was actually happening? >> for us, it is the tip of the iceberg in consumer robotics. we have always been focused on agriculture and industrial defense space. this is the first time that people could expect the technology to come into their lives and have a big impact. we are making all of our robots engineered to think. they truly understand where they are and their environment. they have a personality. they behave in a way that you would not expect a physical character to behave. drive, that was in some ways our trojan horse. the approach has carried over into almost every aspect of daily life. building self be driving cars, eventually? >> the funny thing is we do have

self driving cars in our living rooms. a lot of the projects that we think of as the holy grail of robotics, human robot, that is a good 10, 15, 20 year goal. we are approaching it from the bottom up. we are using it as a stepping stone to do more down the road. >> what about giving each of these devices a personality? can you talk more about that? >> in the context of what they -- of what you saw on stage, each of those cars has a role. one of them was aggressive. something you take for granted in a videogame, but when it happens in front of you, it is really surprising. another character might be more sneaky or defensive. another one might be trying to avoid the skirmish entirely.

all of this gives us the ability to program personalities the same way that you would do with a videogame character. >> stepping back from the specific companies for a second, rob, you have invested in companies that could be considered robotics companies. could you maybe talk about what connects them and what they are looking for in and investment? >> one of the things we look at is if there is something happening in the technology that enables a new set of capabilities that follows what could be more horsepower in the cpu. it could be just more and more wireless and activity, etc., -- more and more wireless conductivity, etc.. looking for things they get better with time. when you look at nests, all three of these companies, they push out software upgrades to their hardware regularly.

what ends up happening is like a baseball glove that we all have that got better the longer you have it. because of these updates, because of the machine learning, the device gets better with time. this is a new relationship and it is something that we look for when we think about robotics related companies. >> what does that do for planned obsolescence? am i going to have a nest and never have to replace it? >> it could be a nest, take a look at the speakers in your house. what ends up happening is instead of going to a given customer and saying they will become a repeat customer, you start to think of customers as people who advocate for your product. for the first time in history you have hardware robotics companies where products become higher net promoters over time. the longer someone has the

nest thermostat drone, the more likely they are to advocate to their friends and colleagues to be purchased. >> matt? is that how you think about it? >> we think about it. we think about the relationship with our customer. we deliver software updates for free, an unknown thing, everything coming on the internet. the product should get better with time, you should love it more and more as time goes on, and that propels us forward. i have a small company that is a growing company. that word-of-mouth is the most valuable thing. as a growing company, we should have new services to get people to buy things they did not have before. >> i wanted to go back to talking about coming from an academic background, robotics.

boris, one of the things you talked about before was the challenge of going from a university setting and being a for-profit company. can you talk about what you have learned, doing that? >> when you are in a university setting it is totally ok to use a half-million dollar robot with $80,000 sensors and quad cpu's in the back to navigate when you want to make a product in consumer robotics that people can afford and use, you have to be very clever on how you use the clever combinations of components, sensors, computations, doing things at a much lower price point than would be possible otherwise. >> is that something you have struggled with as well? >> oh, man. we had to fit seven sensors, two wireless radios, a package that was like this big, it had to be able to run for years.

that is something you have to do in research. >> it is all about performance. >> heavily constrained, ship it. >> people with an academic you also mentioned hiring a lot of background, did you have to kind of yell at them for a while? >> a little bit. the way that it is structured is we have the engineering team that implements those cool ideas. and then we have the guys that know how to ship it, ship it. >> graduate school is a very different problem. the roots are actually the same. the algorithms only made sense years ago, but now they are finding a great place.

click same things with you id. flying together, doing different figure eights, it was hundreds of thousands of dollars, you cannot really reprobate that into the commercial world. our challenge is not it can be to use that all those cameras and completely autonomous. it can move into a small little board. >> have you succeeded in doing that? >> we have had different rhythms -- algorithms to keep it autonomous. you saw it. we haven't made public yet, but we made it autonomous. >> the goal is to make it autonomous. >> that is right.

we had an experiment at the office of a drone following a laser, following a beacon within the port without any aid from the outside, which is really challenging. further finding the algorithms without too much sentencing guides, it is really challenging. >> talk about that same issue from the investor perspective. to what extent, when someone first comes in to pitch you, are you thinking about cost structure? >> one of the things that we can find when someone comes in is how much they loved the product and how much they understood the customer. they want something expensive and reliable. we take a look and try to figure out pretty quickly if this is someone who understands the customer. i know that is not directly the question you are asking, but -- >> right. his cost one of the starters? >> particularly. for a consumer operation we look at the atlantic costly billing

materials around $30 or $40. maybe it is higher value added. >> right now you mentioned enterprise and consumer. >> we look at both. if you look at the things going on around drones, those applications could be around monitoring or applying fertilizer with surveillance. those can support significantly higher price points.

>> nest will do a lot of things for you. that is one of the things we built in from the beginning. automatic demand response and peak energy times. one of the things that is counter to how machines usually work is you have to be transparent. >> maybe a more generalized way of looking that is these devices have to have a way we can turn off the automation. heidi look at that in the drone space in the industrial space? have you had crashes and stuff? >> yes. when they're up in the air and something goes wrong you just go

down. the thingsis one of we're tackling right now. having multiple drivers for motors. when one goes down we have good one waiting for it. yous just more complex when have something in the air and you have gravity pushing down. it makes it a lot more difficult. >> it was an amazing experience. for us, it was a coming out party where we worked on some thicker partners. we have a lot of the same challenges that these guys have wear fundamentally we sell hardware that is very much defined and capable. you have ultimate flexibility on the software side to expand the

experience over time and keep it sooyable and entertaining that the hardware never becomes a bottleneck. a lot of that goes into the original design. being upfront where you cannot predict the things in the software, that becomes one of the most original parts of the -- one of the most challenging parts of the process. >> i know that normally you work with standards and drones, the biggest issue in terms of the most obvious thing in the air? >> all of this infrastructure needs to be regulated. no one has stepped forward or put anything in place that allows us to regulate. i am working with an organization that separates the drone companies that do things for good and for bad. we are both working with

airhighway.org, building the blueprints of what an intercity highway would look like, with pickups, stations, using that to lift up the economy and the city with registration, tall prices and all of that. >> can you talk about where you see the dividing line, as a technology provider, how much will have that? >> a lot of it has to do with the infrastructure that is in place. they will be the ones who put the technology in place for them as well. that has to do with transponders. every time something hooks up, no one looks at it, it gets shut down. these are all things that you can do, at some point. >> we are basically running out of time, but one last lightning round question, 10 years from now, what is one thing that humans do that will be done

primarily by robots? >> self driving cars. >> installing thermometers with drones. >> thermostats. >> entertainment will have much higher levels of intelligence than today. >> thank you guys for joining us. [applause] ♪ >> another segment now from the tech crunch disrupt conference in san francisco. this is a conversation with the ceo of snap chat, a photo sharing application that is valued at more than $800

million. this is 20 minutes. ♪ [applause] >> hey. what's up? >> not too much. great to be here. >> great to have you, man. it has been a really long time since we talked a lot about six hours. how have things changed? >> a lot going on. do you want a snapchat update? >> last time we talked, it was like 200 million snaps a day. >> now we are seeing 350 million snaps every day. >> that's a big number. >> it is super cool. last month, we saw a 50% lift on android stories bases great it is starting to compete with the iphone crew which is very exciting. >> let's talk about the demographics. it is a teen app, all about the teens, but parents are jumping on it. we were talking about how an older group is using it.

what is that looking like? >> i was just snapping my mom this morning. we are growing across every demo. i see 16-year-olds using it at the mall and 30-year-olds using it at the airport. >> awesome. >> this idea of things that disappear and don't last forever on the internet, it is clearly working for you. do you think other apps or social services are going to pick up on this? where do you see the market for ephemeral content going? >> i think the fundamental premise of snap chat is that it is better and more fun if you delete everything except the things you want to save . currently, the way a lot of technology works is that you save everything and delete things that make you feel uncomfortable. more companies will be

i certainly think that interested in this philosophy. it makes you feel better and it celebrates growth. but also saving those things that are important. >> where will snapchat go? you guys do the photo thing and what is it, like 40 characters? >> yes, between 30 and >> are 40. you guys going to go into a different vertical? messages only? snap male? snap mail? >> we spent a lot of time digging at the future of the product. we hired a sociologist and we have been thinking about what we want to build. nathan named the term digital dualism, thinking about the digital and analog world, saying that they are separate. trying to take experiences in the analog world and bring them into the digital with something

like video chat. but it turns out that video chat is kind of lame because the connection breaks up. you could leverage all these aspects of the digital world. you never have to say goodbye. people acknowledge the hybridization of digital and analog area products will be billed in that vein. >> what will they look like? >> if i told you, i would have to kill you. [laughter] one of our latest thinking exercises has been around the social media feet. -- social media feed the.

. it was probably one of the biggest innovations in social media as of late and supercharged the growth of a lot of these some bunnies. -- companies. but the interesting thing about a feed, the more content you consume, the more you look at, the farther away in time you get from your friends. we go to a social media site to catch up with your friends, you end up getting stuck back with one year ago. we have been putting a lot of that does make you feel very good. we have been putting a lot of time into thinking about the feed. >> you are one of the few social apps out there that does not have a feed. my phone is ringing. without a feed, the way these companies are monetized is with a feed. does that mean you might -- aduce a feed tackle ?eed

>> it is one we have to think about because we are a business and have to make money. >> really? >> the way we think about monetization has changed substantially. we look to a role model which is a big company in china that makes a vast majority of the revenue on inapt transactions. when they really had to make money, there was not a huge rent advertising market. they could not say we're going to be a big company. they had to build things that people wanted to buy. that's a scary challenge, rather than taking millions of dollars in display ads, we are going to take what people want. -- we are going to make stuff that people want. we are fortunate to have great long-term investors that believe in our ability to do that. there'll be great innovation along those lines. >> we talked about that a few months ago. there has been a lot of floating

around, maybe you had links or maybe you have more than 33 characters. any hints about what we might be buying from snapchat? >> stickers. >> ok, sexting. you and i have been sexting for a while. it's out there. the older group can't understand why young kids want to send messages that disappear other than to be doing dirty things. you have not had an opportunity to stand up and be like no, this is what's up. i'm giving you your podium right now. what's the deal with it? >> every time i get this, i have

to remind people that snap chat is not a great way to share pictures you want to be secure because people can take a screen -- can take a screenshot or people could trade your trust -- betray your trust. my message is we cannot prevent people who are financially motivated with enough time to betray your trust, we cannot prevent that. it's not a great way to send inappropriate photos. >> i'm going to put this right in your mouth. you told me at one point if you really wanted to sext, why would you want it to disappear in 10 seconds? you can't get anything done in 10 seconds, right? >> i thought that was off the record. >> competition -- you own a space, you own ephemeral messaging. who do you consider your biggest

competitor? >> gosh -- aww, man -- i think in general, we are going a totally different direct -- totally different direction than traditional social media. so i'm not sure we view them as a direct competitor. i think if anything, we want to make sure people have those spaces to create and save really pretty photos, things they are proud of and i want to support the growth of those companies that like to do that. i think we are going a different direction. >> instagram is the hot thing right now. there are 130 million active users on the site and it is the hot new thing. do you guys consider them >> to be a competitor in any way? it's hard not to like something that makes you look pretty.

maybe in terms of you open your phone, which app are you going to choose? i think instagram is really about making sure they look great. i don't think they are products that are directly competitive. if anything, they complement each other. >> facebook is big in social. are you a user? what do you think about facebook? >> i think i have an account. >> you think you have an account? that's not promising. >> we have a snapchat page, so my picture is the fish. i really respect mark. he's done an incredible job. they've done some great recent innovation and they have shown they are going to be around for a long time. that's great for the industry and we think it is great for us. >> what about poke?

they were clearly copying you there and released the product and it was number one for like a day and a half. then it fell off the charts and i really haven't heard anybody mention it and i haven't seen any updates. do you consider it a compliment? >> you are a small company for us and it really showed the snap chat community is special. it was fun to see all of the snapchatters around the world. that was great. we talked about it as the greatest christmas present we ever got. >> facebook built poke. is there a acquisition before chance that they approached you for an that? >> we have not received any formal acquisition offers great >> have you talked with him? >> i have talked to mark a few times. >> you are snapping with him?

your last money round, you got -- your last funding round, you got $60 million. can you tell us about that experience? >> that's a good question. we tend to build those relationships over a long time to make sure investors really understand and support the vision of the company. it is less of the pressure is on, get into the deal for us to bring you into our family and we feel fortunate to have an outstanding and thoughtful investment in our company. >> so $60 million is a big chunk of cash. i'm sure your server bill is out of this world. do you need funding soon? what's that going to look like? are we going to see revenue before your next round? >> hard to say, but i hope so.

>> about revenue, i have another question. we talked about inapt purchases, but what about native advertising? franchises are finding their own way to get on. taco bell was like follow us on snapchat. are you going to get an opportunity to market through the app? >> we like to support their effort. our team is interesting in supporting people that don't have marketing team and a big voice. upcoming artists, people trying to be actors, that is a lot more exciting. people who don't have a social marketing team, we've seen a lot of companies take initiative, like taco bell. they are not the ones i see as needing a lot of help -- i

like to create a space or people who have lots of talent but not a lot of reach can get an awesome and informed audience. >> what would that help look like? >> i can't tell you that. >> it's like sending snaps up here. the lawsuit is happening. i'm sure you're not going to say a whole lot about it. is there anything that has come up with all of these court documents that you are upset about, you don't want up there? >> it would be inappropriate to comment about pending litigation. >> there is one thing i did want to know about the lawsuit before we cut away from it, there's a text you sent to reggie that said i want to know how you came up with disappearing text messages. do you wish you had that snapchat then?

>> the interesting thing is we look at a lot of competitors in this base. there's a company called stealth text focused on sharing secrets that would disappear because you want to cheat on your wife or something like that. we thought there was an opportunity to do something around self-expression. it's interesting to see that idea explored in many ways and i feel fortunate reggie shared that desire with me. [laughter] >> ok. snapchat micro is the new app coming out, your first foray off of the smartphone. are you excited about that? why a smart watch? it does not really go with snap chat in my mind. >> we think it totally does. one of the key parts of our services reducing the amount of

time between seeing something you want to share and being able to share it. maybe it takes a while to get something out of my pocket and get something out of that experience. playing with the prototype of we found the watch, it was easy to grab it and it will pop up on your phone or you can send it. there's a lot of delight around that with two seconds instead of seven. wearables are obviously interesting. i think they are very popular and we want to make sure we are playing around with them. >> what about google glass app? is that something you might consider? >> i don't think so. >> and you would go for the watch but not the headset? why? >> i think it may just be our team's feeling about the product. i think the glasses tend to be more invasive.

having technology melt away, i people talk about the feeling of wearing google glass and don't think that acknowledges the people standing around the person wearing glasses. you feel like you have a gun pointed at you and that does not fit into the snap chat experience or make snap chatters feel comfortable. that's not something we are willing to explore. it would be interesting to see these products incorporate a recording light so that you knew. that would be fun to see. >> even with the watch, snap chat is already this thing that has a ghost around it. people want to find something that might be wrong or dirty just because these messages are disappearing. then you add the layer of you might not know when your photo is being taken. >> i think there is some concern but it's more in the vein of that being a late full experience like a james bond thing.

that may be due to the fact that we like to have faith in people. we think people are generally not mean. >> what about sharing with friends? people want an explanation. -- what about showing best friends? why when the content i'm sending is private, why are you letting people know who i am talking to? >> that is a great question and we get it all the time. when we first built snap chat, there are questions around is this an app to cheat on my significant other? we wanted to show people that pretty simply. we wanted to show people that sign up for the service that this is friends talking to other friends. it has been helpful for people to share secrets. we are all about self-expression and having fun and communicating. >> if you type in so popular into a snap, with no space, you

will get five best friend instead of three best friends. just for the user's sake? is that >> we found that even the three best friends who are sending out a message to our low group was not enough. we started playing around with the idea of having five. >> you're one of my five. >> i'm flattered. >> you have to send me one and then i will get all kinds of crazy stats. what is your favorite app other than snap chat? what can you not go through a day without? >> i love tweetbot. i run that in twitter. it is indispensable. i really like uber.

it's a great example of one of those hybrid services acknowledging all the power of the digital world. that's a signal of some of these to come. >> is there anyone in the space you want to learn from that is just doing things right and you just want to take some cues from them? >> i have been playing with front back app. i'm not sure we are going to take cues from them, but it's fun, the way they articulate the personalization of those. -- photos. it is exciting to me. >> we're just about out of time, but i appreciate you being out here with me. >> thank you. >> thanks, guys. [applause]

>> next, venture capitalists michael moore it's speaking at this year's techcrunch disrupt conference. his remarks are 25 minutes. ♪ >> good morning. you can tell we're sitting right here in the center of the world of technology because this little clicker does not work wirelessly. it is connected to a bell and then to light and then the gentleman that actually moves the slides along, so here we are right in the center of the technology universe. thank you very much for having

sequoia here in the conference this morning. next bitto spend the of time sharing some work that all of us in sequoia have done over the last year or so, trying abouttill our thoughts where we are investing and how we are investing. to share a few ideas with you that are still a little rough i hopethe edges, but will give everybody the sense that right here, between seven cisco and san jose, something utterly remarkable has been going on, is going on and will go on. something that really has only occurred in one or two other places in the whole course of human history. to begin, i'd like to go back and give you a snapshot of life as it was in 1750.

ticket closed look at the slide just for a couple of reasons. one, this farmer with his plow, his most important tool in 1750, wasn't living all that differently from other farmers 2000 years before. he was aiming to self sustenance force family and a few close relatives and friends. he didn't think much about products.s here's disconnected from consumers and the idea of going to an organized work waste would not have crossed his mind. time, in a very small portion, about a smaller silicon valley is, of the northwest of england, the first phase of the industrial revolution began. take a look at this slide.

here you will see a very dramatic change in the organization of the workplace. tools thatization of lay at the heart, the loom of the evolution of the textile industry that changed everything. instead of the farmer working in the fields, people for the very first time were organized in a workplace and in a factory. the factory had a set of suppliers and the products were and a wholesumers raft of communication and distribution facilities were help theseo businesses come about.

the big change was the move to an organized workplace. of theond phase industrial revolution occurred here in america. again in a very confined place. around detroit and largely around pittsburgh, and a confined geography much like silicon valley is today. if you look at the organization of the workplace, it did not change much with nearly textile mills and the growth of the steel mills and later, the growth of the automobile factories. again, what i suppose people called lou collar workers went to work in those factories and over time, a lot of white-collar jobs were created in and around those factories. but the factory itself was also isolated from consumers.