if they got rid of authenticated identity as a requirement, relaxed th priva settings, faster.uld grow a lot in each step along the way they compromised the safety of the people using the producto in er to get to bigger and bigger growth and more and more profit. in the end the real miracle is that they got to 2 billion people on the network before we starte to see the problems. it's a real tribute to how smart and clever they were. >> with the problems they're facing now with data thprivacy, example of facebook as the technology has olved, the people don't use facebook the way he does. how can he solve the problems if he doesn't change his thinking? >> this is exactly the issue. it's not just mark. it's not just facebook. the thing i discovered, i because i was so close to facebook and i saw the issues first there, i thought oniginally it was just an issue being to facebook. what it really is something that affects all internet platforms that are based on advertising and attention. sooogle and instagram and youtube and twitter and snapchat are all affected. but the challenge here is t

the priva notice is aimed at transparency on this point as it describesain d which data will be received by phillips, an phillips will only share their data with these independent third parties at theuser's request. of infos collects loa that has nothing to do with serving coffee. the policy, the web pages you view, including the date and time, and the subject of the ads you click orol s over. he says starbucks then allows third parties to access that info. the hapolicy, w added certain features to our websites and mobile applicationshat allow social networks, such as facebook, twitter, to track the aces of their members. >> can you be 100%ure about everything that's been collected in most of these policies? >> not necessarily. i think that that's not an accident. eporter: starbucks tells us the privacy of our customers is incredibly imptant to us, and we regularly evaluate all policies to make sure we're protecting their best interests. we strive to be transparent. we do not sell information to advertising companies. you'll also note that the terms of our policy provide customers option

we know for certain that there are issuesith public health, democracy, priva competition and innovation. and pretending otherwise is harmful not just to facebook and google and i nstagram and the rest, it's harmful to society and it's harmful to zblerch if these companies continue to be resistant, what is the solution. do you think they should begu ated, and what should that regulation look like? >> there are several areas they need to think about. one of the questions off the top is there are business practices that take place in our society that we have accepted without thought. is that companies that collect our data are allowed to sell it to anybody they want or trade others as facebook would do. for example, why is it reasonable for people to collect our credit card transaction data and sell it to somebody else? i thi we need to have a debate on that. same thing for geolocation data from cell phones. why hould it b legitimate to gather data on minors, people under 18. ?" this is a debate we need to have. we also need to have anti-trust regulation. they're behaving like month o the

it's linked with a probe into priva privacy. last year, it was revealed a consulting firm improperly accessed the private data of 90 million users. if alking break down, the f could take facebook to court. >>> you may want to think twice before drinking diet soda. doreen gtzler has a new warning for women. >> reporter: according to the heart association, womenho drink two or more diet drinks a r day is at a higher risk stroke and heart disease. they followed women over 11 years. those that drank one low-calorie drink a day, were 23% more likely to have a stroke, compared to those that drink them less than once a week or not at all. blocked arteries were the main culprit. the women were 29% more likely to develop heart disease and 16% more lely to die prematurely for any cause. e risk were higher for obese and african-american women who had no history of disease or diabetes. >> that was doreen gentzler reporting. the reason why is still unclear. and is important to note the study did not show cause and effect. researchers say it

the news outlet got hold of the priva private schedules and show the president spent 60% of his timeed executive time. which is code for watching cable news and talking with his supporters on the phone, which is extraordinary on its face and mind boggling to see in black and white that the president spends most of his time not doing his job, also, just as remarkable is that we have these schedules in the first place, the president's private schedules are called private for a reason. they are not supposed to be leaked to the public. since the president took office, there have been a stunning number of leaks from this white house from intelligence professionals in particular sounding the alarm about the threat that the president poses to national security. there were leaked transcripts with foreign leaders and the anonymous op ed and the report about the unsecured cell phone and the leak about the fbi investigation into whether he's actually secretly a foreign agent. more recently, there were reports about the handling of a security clearance for the president's son-in-law jared kushne

you are not going to solve infrastructure problems just priva privatizing. i'm not against it. it's a tool in the tool box, it's not the tool box. so i'll come back to that in a second. the thing i will agree with mitch on and i have advocated for this. we were trying to build -- and we built a train station near mccormick place on the south side of chicago, near south side. i had to do an environmental study. the state then had to go over our environmental study and the feds did. forget -- it should be consolidated. but that's not the biggest problem. and it was a dirt piece of land. i said it's a subway station, for god's sakes. and i told president obama, this is nuts. i do a study, the state has to relationship indica replicate the study. what you lose is the cost of time. it is -- driving some costs. but on the infrastructure, and i disagree with mitch. i have advocated for it. i recently did for our state. mitch's successor has raised the gas tax in indiana, wisconsin has, michigan has. 24 of the 27 -- of the 50 states have raised the gas tax. i'm for it in illinois. and

but the staff plan was to reduce and sell everything off through what's called asset recycling or priva privatizing. that had no one on either side of the aisle thinking it was a good idea. it was a thought piece that went into the wastebasket. pieceries have a place, but they won't work everywhere. when we had a select committee on p3s five years ago now, bipartisan, at the end of the deliberations, we had a panel of bond people and macquarie and sin extra and all that. and i said, okay, the most liberal possible rules regarding p3s, and you know the depths and breadth of our infrastructure needs. you know where you can make money or get a cash flow and where you can't. what percent of our infrastructure needs could you meet with p3s under those conditions? their answer, and these are advocates for it, was 12%. other experts have said 8 to 10. so p3s are a tool, but they're not going to get us there. we need a federal government making substantial investments in a national transportation system. not state by state. a national system. an integrated system. we've got to get back to the v