this week, robots around humans. a push to break california into three parts and a famous venture capitalist defend his disastrous investment. our reporters richard waters from the "financial times." this week on "press here." good morning. i'm scott mcgrew. i am always completely straightforward with my guests, and i invited my first guest, venture capitalist tim draper on today to talk about the three california projects, but then

the news cycle interfered. we're going to talk about his ideas to break california into three parts in a moment. before that we've got to talk about this. have you ever had an opinion, something you just assumed was true and then somebody who knows way more about it than you do tells you you're wrong? i assumed that's what we were hearing about blood testing company theranos that the young leader had pulled the wool our over eyes. the blood testing machines she had invented didn't work. the story of the alleged scam will hit book stores on monday. "bad blood" written by a wall street reporter has already been opinion shunned for a movie. venture capitalist ken draper invested a lot of mon know. he seems to be more angry with john kerry radio and richard

waters on the financial sometimes. i saw you on cnbc. are you saying theranos was legit? >> abtely. entrepreneurs, when they get started, they're trying to change the world. they're trying to do something extraordinary and they pull things together and raise money and they do whatever they can to make this new world happen. they made all our lives so much better, this table, your watch, your microphone, the whole thing. these were all entrepreneurs way back when and got something going. she came to me when she was 19 years old and said, i'm leaving stanford and i'm going the change health care as we know it. health care has become corrupt. it has been -- it's become a real problem. we overpay. we get bad care and i have a mission. >> you gave mer $1 million. >> we gave her $1 million to get going on that business.

it's very innovative and it still is very innovative. now there are 15 theranos knock aups. >> richard waters from the "financial times" -- >> there is a theranos machine. i took the test. i compared it to the test i took at the doctor's office and they were almost identical. >> was the blood -- your blood analyzed on a theranos sheen? >> yes, on a theranos machine. >> let's back up a moment. i agree with you, entrepreneurs do what they want to do but there's a line. the question is where is that line. we know to create a company you have to invent a reality, invent a future. you persuade people to come on your side. investors like you, that's what you're in business for. it isn't just a journalist that said she stepped over the line. >> it's a journalist that said it 45 times in a row.

>> that doesn't make it true. >> well, it does seem to make it true, somehow if they write it over and over and over. >> the ssec has filed charges - >> there's something very odd about that whole thing. >> which is? >> as i understand it, this is a private investment in a private company, not regulated by the sec, and the sec is trying to reach down below the public companies and go into the unicorns because nobody wants to go public anymore because being public costs $500,000 a year. >> you're saying because theranos was never publicly-traded, if there was

fra fraud, it wouldn't be the purview of the sec because it's individual private investors including yourself. >> i'm saying we're investors in extraordinarily successful. if they become extraordinarily successful, what's interesting is the news wants to go after them. they went after zuckerberg. they went after elizabeth. >> the sec has it on file. have you read the complaint. >> what's generally thought of as a credible newspaper, 43 articles, all very much innuendo, all clearly fed by the competition -- wait a second. all clearly fed by the competition. and then suddenly the news

starts spreading and people go, oh, it must be the case. then the government gets involved. that's why the sec got involved. i believe that happened in this case. >> my question is, and it's clear that you see that's been overblown. but my question to you is what do you think happened? what's your assessment of, was there dishonesty, were they being dishonest art, even if they had the technology in place for some of the tests, my understanding is it wasn't used for all the tests they were saying it was used for, was that rallgoi i would say she was always completely honest with me, and i'm sure she was completely honest with all those investors, and when you're an entrepreneur, you're trying to get there as quickly as possible. i think it would have been better if she had said this is a

beta test, we're trying this out. but she had been ten years in the making. this had been ten years in the making. she really did need to get that product out, and it was going to hit the consumer. so that was the issue. it would have been nice to have it be a beta test. that's retro spekt. when you're a entrepreneur, you're pulling things together, making things happen. >> the company still exists. you've invested money. you have rights in that company. could you bring a machine next week? >> my investment is gone, pretty much gone, any way you shake it. and i still feel fantastic about having made it. i feel like she did everything she possibly could have to make that company successful. >> the machines exist? >> absolutely. >> and someone theoretically

could take one and put it on that desk and we could test it and it would work? >> yes. >> you weren't on the board? >> no. >> you made an early investment. >> early investment. then she went into stealth mode. >> i fully understand why you want to back her fully. it's one of the strengths in the valley system that investors see a good idea wholeheartedly. she went in stealth mode, wasn't really talking to her investors. how can you sit here and competently say she's being maligned? >> because i watched it happen. it happened to uber, it happened to all of these successful -- >> but the facts of this case, you watched it from a distance. the put them on file. yes, other than innuendo there? no. >> there was lying to investors and lying to partners.

>> now, that was absolutely wrong. that was absolutely wrong. she did not lie to investors. >> investors were aware of the fact that not all the tests were actually run on theranos technology and equipment? >> those investors came in before she even shipped. >> but that still doesn't answer the question. were they aware -- >> so how could they have been? it was before it even shipped. >> aren't you updating the investors as you're moving forward with the company? >> presumably. i don't know how all that happened between her and her investors. you guys go ahead, badger me all you want, but i believe that entrepreneurs are doing extraordinary things. they -- the media is starting to take down the tall trees and i think it's a huge mistake. i think we would all be better off if we had theranos machines operating out there and doing our blood tests for us now,

whether they're 2% off or something different, all those mothers that are saying, h, my god, this was the greatest thing for my child, i think that writer basically destroyed this company, and i think this would have been -- >> hold on. i'm going to break in here. tim, you are so passionate about defending elizabeth and her company. father to father, is that because you are a skilled venture can'talist, which you are, or is that because -- she was a friend of your daughter. you met her when she was 19. you have been paternalistic towards her this whole time. how much of this passion is because you think she's a kind, decent, skilled and talented woman? and how much of the passion is based on spreadsheets and business? >> i would defend the entrepreneur absolutely in this kind of case, no matter who that

entrepreneur was, because that entrepreneur is doing what they can to make our future better, and they are struggling and trying to make things happen, and then they get all of this trouble -- if they become big enough, and in her case she got to be a big personality, and that big personality came and worked against her moving forward because they were going after her in every way they could. >> tim, my friend, do you want to talk about the three california thing? >> yes, let's do. i'm going to go to commercial break. if you are joining us on the internet, we're going to talk about three california. if you're watching on television, we'll talk about robots suits coming up and tough new rules for tech companies. we'll get it all done. back in a moment. lawyer. he tops the charts on progressive causes... winning pro bono battles for immigrants and the homeless.

defending gay rights and gun control. democrat jeff bleich. after columbine, bleich led president clinton's youth violence initiative. with joe biden, bleich took on domestic violence. served president obama as special counsel and ambassador. maybe bleich can't pull off the rockstar look... but his progressive record is solid gold.

this friday brand new rules take into effect that limit what tech companies can do with its data, gdpr, a single set of rules that cover privacy, consent and what the europeans call the right to be forgotten. they are the most important and toughest rules controlling the internet in years. to be clear, these rules don't cover american consumers, but they are ideas becoming more popular among americans thanks

to problems at facebook and other companies. pour rah kay represents ireland and is here to walk us through it. joining us. what's the most important thing -- let's start with as a small company, pressheretv.com, you can watch it in the eu. is there something i need to be doing immediately? >> yes. a few things to note. this applies globally. it applies to any company doing business in europe. that means if you're a silicon valley tech company and you have customers in europe -- >> if i sell something in europe, if i collect somebody's data out of europe, if i'm just serving videos of this tv show, i should be okay. >> if you have customer data in europe, consumer data in europe, rarldless of whether you have an office there, this applies to you. the gdpr gives consumers additional rights and control over their data. for example, you need to have consent now to have that

information. you need to inform companies you're using it or storing it. consumers have the right to withdraw that consent or else to request it be deleted. there's kind big fines for this. >> 4% of global revenue. >> the big thing for companies, the advice is it's happening. it's coming in next week. so to be prepared and be as prepared as possible. that means having -- being familiar with what the obligations are are around collecting data, around having consent and also to have the right processes and steps in place to manage that process. >> the timing is interesting with everything going on with facebook now. under these rules, could a cambridge analytica-like scenario have occurred?

>> who knows. >> anything can happen. >> i think what we're seeing, it's been in the press a lot and coverage a lot and technology companies are certainly being challenged to be more transparent with how they manage personal data. certainly i think the gdpr provides a model for that, things like introducing notifications for breaches within 72 hours. i think what we're learning is that personal data, it's not just in europe that people are getting more interested in this. consumers globally are becoming more aware of it. certainly we're seeing it in other countries as well, in canada, israel, other countries, new zealand are also looking at these gdpr-like regulations. >> it's a massively ambitious move. as you say, a lot of people instinctively are going to say i like this, gives me more control over my own data.

as soon as you pick it apart, it's so complex, trying to understand how it affects companies and what they need to do and what the unintended consequences might be, becomes very, very difficult. just to take a couple of examples, it rests on the principle that you're giving people the power to decide how the data is used. most people don't have enough information or knowledge to make that decision. so if a lab tech company, a company that collects data, repackages it and sells it to google says to me, i want permission to use your data, how on earth can i decide if that's a good thing or bad thing? i'm already hearing we're in a position where -- i'm finding it myself, companies in europe are saying to me do i consent? can i use your data. >> consent to what? >> i'm deciding if i trust this company. people will give googletr many smaller canieswon't

able to do that. >> i think what we're seeing, we're seeing there's probably a lot of companies that won't be prepared for this. i'm less concerned about the big tech companies, but about 40% of the investors we work with would have less than three or 400 people globally. for them it's about what are the guidelines here, where are the goal posts i need to aim for to be compliant? that's where the leg tore system will be important. it makes it easier to navigate the regulatory system. instead of dealing with 28 different regulators all over europe, you can deal with one that handles your case. ireland has been prominent in that because the scale of the tech cluster means the irish data protection commissioner has built up a lot of expertise. >> interesting that facebook shifted a lot of its customers out of ireland ahead of this.

a lot of international customers -- >> to britain, out of the eu. >> shipped them out of the eu. facebook is lead regulated in ireland. they moved them out. >> the key advice we have for companies really is, maybe there's things that need to be managed, but there's a lot to be said for having a presence in europe. what of the advices we would give, a lot to be there, set up an operation. obviously ireland as a location, we found out the investors we work with, they value the stability that being at the heart of europe with that offer. >> ireland, the home of facebook and apple and twitter and google, thank you. >> up next, the closest thing to ironman i've seen so far. i approve this message.

i thought after sandy hook, where 20 six and seven year olds were slain, this would never happen again. it has happened more than 200 times in 5 years. dianne feinstein and a new generation are leading the fight to pass a new assault weapons ban. say no to the nra and yes to common-sense gun laws. california values senator dianne feinstein

. welcome back to "press here," it's hard to think my next guest without making a comparison to pop culture. first thing that occurred to me was a suit from "ironman." a colleague said the first thing she thought of was the loading equipme equipment. this is awarable suit, like an ironman suit that gives the wearer extra strength and

stamina, useful for working above your head as one of our producers demonstrate here. max shader gucci is the cfo at exo bionics. did you grow up watching "6 million dollar man?" >> of course. >> you're oscar cold man. >> my mom has a cochlear implant, bionic ear. >> the first thing i think of is not necessarily industrial. it's for handicap with paralysis and things. >> the company started out of berkeley and was all about load carriage, holing soldiers carry heavy loads in the field. it quickly morphed to how do we help people in a wheelchair stand and walk again. why we could do that so well is our suit is very, very intelligent. it knows a user's capability. as that patient takes a step, if

he or she struggles, the artificial intelligence kicks in and helps complete that step. if the user is getting better, it's going to give -- the device will give less assist. what it's doing is kicking in neuro plasticity, allowing the brain to rewire to below the injury level and hopefully people leave the hospital in much better shape than they can with today's current standard of care. >> what's the business model for it? do you sell the suits? >> today our primary focus is rehabilitation. so we have the best technology out there today. we wrap robots around a human better than anybody else. it's not good enough to be walking down the street. that's coming in the future. what it's good enough for is to get up early after your injury, get up often and take a lot of steps. that's where we're focusing today, b to b, we sell to hospitals and those are our customers. >> this is exciting technology. my question is how is it going

to become more widely used. your suits, there are 150,000, and obviously high value cases like the kind of patients you're talking about, anyone can see the value. for this to become a wider-used technology, the price has to fall a lot. i tried one suit by your competitor, less capable but in the tens of thaw sands in terms of price, still very heavy to wear, quite expensive. can you see a time when this actually becomes even a consumer -- i can use one in my garden. >> richard, absolutely. these suits will be ubiquitous. at some point in time it will be like wearing blue jeans, kevlar going down the side, sensors knowing that max is getting tired hiking with his grandchildren. at some point that's going to be the future. today it's kind of like the first cell phones, the big bricks. the technology can only do so much.

eventually you're going to add the video and the internet and the camera. the same thing is going to happen with exoskeleton. >> you made a deal with ford where people will be able to work longer -- >> not will be. they are. >> why would the union green to such a thing? >> what we do is wraparound the human. >> you are in the sense if i can do the job more efficiently. i remember post office was particularly against it with the scooters because you would deliver the mail twice and fast and need fewer postmen. >> you're lifting aon yr should. here you have an opportunity to stay longer at that position,

something that you love, that's why you went to that business, and you can stay on and have a more fulfilling career and not be prone to injuries. you're always lifting your arm. workers love it and they leave the day less fatigued. they leave the day less beaten up. we also make an arm to help construction workers, they can work for two minutes, rest for five minutes. they're beaten up in the mid 30s. now with an arm suspended in front of them, they become craftsmen. they do better work, less tired and less prone to injury. if you have demographic changes where the population is getting older, you're not going to be able to find the labor. >> i'm curious what other occupations are you seeing interest from or are you looking into? i'm thinking of every elderly person -- >> that's probably one of our biggest challenges. there's a lot of applications for augmenting the human capability.

we want to develop areas and then we'll turn our attention to other areas. >> any one of your engineers building an ironman suit in his or her spare time, ironwoman suit? >> we have built an ironman suit for the u.s. army. it does everything the ironman suit does, but not the flying. >> max, thanks for being here. >> thank you very much. he's been called a rockstar lawyer. he tops the charts on progressive causes...

winning pro bono battles for immigrants and the homeless. defending gay rights and gun control. democrat jeff bleich. after columbine, bleich led president clinton's youth violence initiative. with joe biden, bleich took on domestic violence. served president obama as special counsel and ambassador. maybe bleich can't pull off the rockstar look... but his progressive record is solid gold. that's our show for this week. my thanks to our guest. if you joined us less, you missed our interviewer with tim draper. you can find that interview at pressheretv.com. thank you for joining us and making us part of your sunday morning. and welcomeo,

to "comunidad del valle." i'm damian trujillo, and today, empowering women. plus "la carpa de los rasquachis" on your "comunidad del valle." male announcer: nbc bay area presents "comunidad del valle" with damian trujillo. damian: we begin today with the san francisco international arts festival. and with us is kerensa demars, who is a flamenco performer, but is here to talk about the festival in general. welcome to the show. kerensa demars: thank you, thanks for having me. damian: well, tell us first of all--first is it something that, at a young age, you started doing that? or how did that come about? kerensa: well, i wish, but i wasn't born in spain. i actually went there later to study. and, but in spain, many kids do start learning flamenco age.fr a damian: by choice, or just because they see it-- kerensa: well, some even have it in gym class. damian: wow, wow. and what got you--what made you think-- kerensa: oh, i just saw flamenco for the first time, and i was absolutely hooked.