he picked on human trafficking, a great issue of reason and underexposed. it was important throughout the year to have a theme and expose the other 49 attorneys general to that issue. i felt the privacy in the digital age, privacy on the internet was a critical issue for -- a bipartisan issue that affects everybody. everyone for the most part, at their home, the library, at work, they're going to be buying and purchasing things. susceptible to having their privacy rights infringed. now, we don't look at it as we are going to indict the internet market or the providers. we are doing is trying to have a conversation about where the line between privacy and the legitimate business rights of the internet providers, where should that be drawn? people would drive in a different place, but we want to have that i like to make sure consumers are protected in terms of privacy, but that google and other internet providers are able to conduct business because most of what we do on the internet is freak. but basically have a legitimate interest in advertising. >> host:

he picked human trafficking, a great issue, obviously, underexposed, and it's important to expose the other 49 attorneys general to the issue. i thought privacy on the internet was a critical issue as a bipartisan issue, and it effects everybody. everybody, for the most part, is going to be on the internet whether at their home, at the library or at work, and they're going to be buying and purchasing and things and being susceptible to having privacy rights infringed. we don't look at it as having privacy rights, where is the line between privacy and the legitimate business rights of the internet providers where should that be drawn? people will draw it in a different place, but we want to have that dialogue and insure the consumers are protected and google and other bear net providers are able -- internet providers are able to conduct their business. most of what we do on the internet is free to the consumer, but they certainly have a legitimate issue in advertising to us. >> host: why are you looking at that issue at the state attorney general level? >> guest: well, we've really bec

the images were pretty underexposed for a normal photographer. i just brightened them up. that is what the bare filter gives you when you look at mars. >> for doug, since you simulated the fly away of the sky crane, can you estimate the angle at which it struck the surface? >> i can eyeball it. something around 45 degrees, but that is a guess. >> we have one question up here in the front. then we will go to one on the phone line. then we will come back. >> can you compare what you have got with what you will have. can you give us a sense of how much bigger, in terms of scale, these other images are? >> the data volume will be 64 times larger. the resolution will be eight times better. these are extremely reduced versions of what we will be getting. in a sense, we originally proposed zoom lenses. i am giving you a slow-motion zoom. eventually, we will use the 100 millimeter lens and that will get you closer. this is pretty enough and interesting enough that we thought we'd share with you guys. we have not filled in the top and you saw there were gaps in the bottom. those we

the integers were pretty underexposed for a normal photographer, so what britain them up and that is what the bair filter gives you when you look at mars. >> since the simulated the flyaway of the sky crane, can you estimate the angle at which it struck the surface? >> the edl will be on the panel tomorrow. they can give you a better answer to that. it is something around 45 degrees. they will be the best people that asked tomorrow. >> one question up here in the front. then we will go to one on the phone line. >> could you compare what you have got with what you will get, give us a sense of how much bigger in terms of the scale of this other image is when you get the whole thing, and will you fill in the top as well? >> it will be 64 times larger. the resolution will be a times better. these are extremely reduced versions of what we are getting paid in a sense, we are originally proposed zoom lenses, so i'm giving you a slow-motion him. we have a low-resolution camera, and then we will go to a height- resolution camera, and then we will use a 100-millimeter lens. this was pretty eno

concerned to make sure if there was something that we didn't saturate the detector, so the images were underexposed for normal photographer so i just write him out and that is what the filter gives you when you look at mars. some texans use simulated the flyaway can you estimate the ingalls that is struck the surface cracks >> i'm sure they will be on the panel tomorrow that can give you a better answer then. something around 45 degrees i would have guessed that is just kind of a guess. >> let's see, we've got one question up here in the front. then we will go to one on the phone line and then come back to do. >> jongh from dtc for mica again. can you compare what you have got with what you will come just a sense of how much bigger in terms of scale with this other image is. will you sort of fell in the top as well? >> of the party will be 64 times larger because these are one down. the resolution will be eight times better so they are extremely reduced versions of what we are getting. in the sense we originally proposed the zoom lenses, so i'm basically give you a slow-motion zoom. as we have a lo

market share getting a little bit of the outperformance narrowing, underexposed to fast-growing energy drinks -- >> that's been the case for coca-cola for years even through this period of outperformance of the markets. seemed like a call where they wanted to ring the bell before there was -- they wanted to say, take a look at the valuation. near term, it's trading on a historical premium to its own valuation. we are getting worried. they raised their price target but cut the shares. it was a cautious call, was my interpretation of the whole thing. >> i don't like this call at all, frankly. they're telling you to rotate into campbell's. we had treehouse say the soup category was bad. campbell's has just been a terrible stock. this is not hershey. campbell's and hershey for a long time, campbell's has been such a terrible performer. you want to own coke for the next 40 points. >> and the reasons behind the campbell -- campbell's goes from sell to conviction buy list -- it's skipping a couple of steps because of cost controls and better marketing after their soup category. a little tenuo