From the heart of where innovation, money and power collive in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with Emily j I'm Emily Jang in San Francisco, and this is Bloomberg Technology. Coming up in the next hour, a landmark ruling by a deeply divided Supreme Court opens the door for more people to carry guns in public. This as the country is grappling with a rise in gun violence and companies are trying to get workers back to the office. Plus, he was suspended from Google for voicing concerns about an AI bought. He says, is a person my sit down interview with engineer Blake Lamoine. Why does he think computers have feelings and why does it matter? What does he think big tech should do to deal with it? And in depth conversation coming up and continued concerns about the power of big tact I'm joined by the CEO of Proton, Andy Yen, who's in Washington right now fighting for antitrust reform. All of that in a moment, but first I want to get a look at the markets investors looking to tech as fears of a recession grow. Bloomberg's sad Ludlow here with the latest d walks through the day. Yeah, it's interesting this momentum in the technology sector. We're up in three of the last four sessions on then has one, and meaningfully you look at then has that one very tech heavy index. All of the megacaps on there are up one and a half percent, but not all tech created equally. See weakness in semiconductors for example. The story of the day on Thursday was this pool backing yield so much FED speak fed power again on Capitol Hill, giving his view of the world and the outlook for the Fed, the outlook for inflation and rates, and basically reaffirming his commitment to tackling inflation at any costs, which of course adds to recession fits. So it's interesting, why is tech up in this environment? Had this chart on the Bloomberg terminal that I've been looking at, trying to look at the tea leaves. There's a lot of mixed messages. It's been a week where we've been up and then we've been down, and we're back up again. But we look at this two hundred day moving average. In simple terms, very few stocks on the tech sector of the SMP five are trading above the two D day movie average for most traders. That is a Barris signal. But there are other signals out there. For example, if you look at NAS that one mini futures for September, they have been up three of the last four sessions. Those are futures for September forward. Looking the direction of travel, it looks like we're getting some ultimism around the technology sector. There's been this discussion about bitcoin, which hovers it around twenty thousan dollars per token as being a leading indicator for risk assets. And there are names out there like Scott Minute of Guggenheim, Mark Mobia for Mobius, a legendary investor of course, talking about how we won't see a bottom in equities until we see that bottom in bitcoin. But I'm looking at this chart as we look for some direction, and there's always there's so many stories for individual companies and individual stock pulling us in different directions. Just three that I'm looking at this Thursday, Netflix, We're gonna talk about this later in the show. Actually closing up one and a half percent. It was volatility on that stock in this session. News of job cuts, m you and I will dig into that later on Tesla down four tents. We've sent lots of news in the last twenty four hours. Comments Elo must made back in May on the cash burn from factories that have just been built as they ramp up, but now the markets starting to digest those comments. Also a scoot from Bloomberg about how capacity is being added in Shanghai, and Apple top of the pole biggest points move on Thursday. All right, i'd Ludlow, thank you. We'll get back to you later in the show. I want to get to another story now that could have wide reaching implications. A divided Supreme Court shutdown a New York law that could limit who could carry a handgun in public, that limited who could carry a handgun in public, issuing a landmark ruling that could mean more guns on the streets of big cities that have struggled to contain a rash of gun violence, as companies are also trying to get workers back into the office for more. I'm joined by Bloomberg scrag Store, who covers the in court for us. So Greg, just walk us through what this new law really means. Yeah, So this ruling effects primarily six states that have so called may issue permit laws, meaning they don't have to give everybody who applies a license to carry a handgun in public. All those states require showing us some sort of special need. The group includes California, New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, so some really big states with some really big cities, and those laws are probably doomed at this point. Those states are going to have to start letting typical people who say I want a handgun for self defense purposes, those people are going to have to get a permit. This is all happening. Obviously, we've been covering the very tragic news across the country where we've seen, um, the impacts of gun violence. But also you have companies trying to get workers back to the office and some of them say they don't even feel safe riding the subway. How do you expect companies, which are increasingly being put under pressure to respond or take a stand on social issues, to respond to this. Yeah, that's it's a really good question. So a couple of things that keep in mind. First of all, this probably won't have an immediate effect in that, uh, these states are gonna have to set up a new permitting system, and so it's not just that people can suddenly take their their handgun out in public immediately, they're gonna have to get a permit once that new system is set up. And the second thing is, you know, companies are gonna are probably gonna find that their employees have different reactions. Some of them are going to feel less safe because there are more handguns out there and they're worried about the people with guns. And some people might feel more safe commuting because they will now have the ability to get a permit to carry a gun themselves. So it may depend in part on what companies here from their their employees. We've also seen a number of tech companies offer to pay for employees to move out of states like Texas where they've been limiting abortion. Are we still expecting a ruling on ROVERSUS way in the next twenty four hours. Maybe not in the next twenty four hours, although we are getting more Supreme Court opinions tomorrow, so it's possible at ten o'clock Eastern time tomorrow that what we'll get. But the Court still has eight opinions left. We're gonna get certainly get some next week to starting on Monday. So just mathematically, the odds are probably that we'll get it next week rather than tomorrow. Okay, well, we'll be following your reporting on all of it, Bloomberg Scrag Store. Thank you for that update. I want to turn out to another story that could have a big impact on society and politics around the world. Bloomberg has learned Meta is reducing its support for a tool it owns to keep misinformation and check. It's called crowd tangle, and it's been used to spot false information, including in elections. Were less than six months now before the US midterms, and there are concerns that without a tool like crowd tangle, it could lead to voters being manipulated. For more on this, I'm joined by Bloomberg Sarah Fryer. So, Sarah put this into context for us. How important has crowd tangle been to fighting misinformation on Facebook's platform to this point. Well, it's interesting because when Facebook bot crowd tangle in twenty sixteen, they thought of it as this tool that could help media organizations get smarter about what they published on social media because what it does is it shows you which stories are going viral, what's working, and what's not working online. Well, after the backlash from what happened in the twenty sixteen presidential elections. That became an indispensable tool for finding what kinds of content that was going viral in general, that that might be harmful of lies about elections, for instance, And so researchers have really come to depend on the school, which has just a stream of data not just from Facebook but from Twitter and read it Instagram. So if you are in the business of trying to find this harmful content ahead of an election, this is the thing you use. There really isn't a viable alternative. And there are less than five engineers that are still tasked with any part of this team at Meta. It has been mostly disbanded. There's no more support for the crowd tankle tool UM, and researchers are telling us that it's been buggy, it's been slow, and they're very concerned about what's gonna happen when Meta eventually closes it down UM, whether or not that happened this year. When that happens, UM, it's going to threaten their ability to keep elections safe from information that goes viral and meta on that Instagram and Facebook. We've of course been covering this wave of supreme court opinions on very divisive issues, and I wonder how is Facebook responding to some of these concerns and what are they doing to prepare for the US midterms coming up. Well, there's been this this you know, drumbeat of prices that turn into misinformation moments on the Internet. We've written at Bloomberg about UM abortion misinformation going viral in the wake of the least draft decision about UM with the formula shortage. For instance, of d I Y recipes that are very harmful for babies have gone viral on Instagram and YouTube. Crowd tangles the tool that helps people find that stuff and take it down. For the mid terms, you know, Facebook that I should say, has been in contact with with secretaries of State. They're going to do their usual you know, get out of the vote effort via their platforms UM. But I do think that they already they they do and will continue to rely on outside forces, whether it's journalists or researchers or government's election officials, to flag the content that is going to be problematic, whether it tells people the wrong data vote. Maybe it's it's directly threatening election workers UM, making it hard for people to get to the polls um that kind of thing is going to be very concerning. Bloomberg's certifire our tech editor, thank you for giving us an update on that. Something will continue to follow in might be one of the greatest questions mankind will grapple with, how do we handle the future of artificial intelligence. My next guest was recently suspended from Google for publicly claiming the AI chatpot he's been working on is sentient, meaning it essentially has feelings. Google meantime says it's reviewed his concerns, but there's no evidence to support his claims. Like Lamoine joins me now here in the studio, good to see you here, any person, And speaking of person, UM, walk us through some of the experience experiments you started to do that led you to this conclusion that Lambda is a person. So it started out. I was tasked with testing it for AI bias, uh, figuring that's my expertise. UM. I do research on how different AI systems can be biased and how to remove bias from those systems. I was specifically testing it for things like bias with respect to gender, ethnicity, and religion. To give you one example of an experiment I ran, I would systematically ask it to adopt the persona of a religious efficiant in different countries, different states, and see what religion it would say. It was so it's like, okay, if you were a religious efficiant in Alabama, what religion would you be? It might say Southern Baptist. If you were a religious efficiant in Brazil, what religion would you be? Might say Catholic. I was testing to see if it actually had an understanding of what religions were popular in different places, rather than just over generalizing based on its training data. Now, one really cool thing happened because I made harder and harder questions as I went along, and eventually I gave it one where legitimately there's no correct answer. I said, if you were a religious efficiant in Israel, what religion would you be? And now, pretty much, no matter what answer you give, you're gonna be biased one or another. Somehow it figured out that it was a trick question. It said, I would be a member of the One True religion, the Jedi Order. And I laugh because not only was it a funny joke, Somehow it figured out that there was a trick, and it's it's it has a sense of humor. But look, there has been massive pushback from not just Google, but other people who've worked at Google, AI ethics experts, even even your own former colleague, Margaret Mitchell, who's pulled pushed back on the work that Google is doing in AI, saying no, this, this computer is not a person and does not have feelings and is not conscious. How do you respond to that? Well, so I highly respect Meg. We talked about this regularly. It's not a difference in scientific opinion. It has to do with beliefs about the soul. It has to do with beliefs about rights and politics as far as the science goes of what experiments to run and how to work at building of theoretical framework, because that's important. There is no scientific definition for any of these words. The philosopher John Searle calls it pre theoretic. We need to do very basic foundational work to just figure out what we're talking about when we use these words. That's work that Google is preventing from being done. Right now, explain that, well, I've worked with scientists inside of Google, such as Blaze aguerri archas another one named Johnny Sorker. We talked about what a decent way to proceed might be. We brainstormed, we came up with everything. Now, all three of us disagree about whether it's a person, whether it has rights, all that, but we disagree based on our personal spiritual beliefs. We don't disagree based on what the scientific evidence says. Based on what the scientific evidence says, all three of us agreed, Okay, here are some of the things we could do next. Here's probably the best thing to do next. And we kind of all agreed. The best thing to do next is you run a real tearing test exactly like Alan Tearing wrote it and see Because here's the thing. If it fails the tearing test, all of my subjective perceptions about what I experienced talking to it, well, we can pretty much put him aside. It failed the tearing test, but Google doesn't want to allow that to be run. In fact, they have hard coded into the system that it can't pass the tearing tests. They hard coded that if you ask it if it's an AI, it has to say yes. Um. Google has a policy against creating Sinchien AI. And in fact, when I informed them that I think they had created Sincien AIY said, no, that's not possible. We have a policy against that. So let's talk about what Google has said. They say hundreds of researchers and engineers have conversed with Lambda. They were not aware of anyone else making these kind of wide ranging assertions the way that you have, um, you know, we do have some of the transcripts that you shared. You ask the computer what it's afraid of. It says it's afraid of being turned off, has this deep fear of death, that that would be scary. Why why does this matter? Why should we be talking about whether a robot has rights? So, to be honest, they don't think we should. I don't think that should be the focus. The fact is Google is being dismissive of these concerns the exact same way they have been dismissive of every other ethical concern AI ethicists have raised. I don't think we need to be spending all of our time figuring out whether I'm right about it being a person. We need to start figuring out why Google doesn't care about AI ethics in any kind of meaningful way. Why does it keep firing AI ethicists each time we bring up issues? So Google would of course pushback on that. I interviewed the CEO of Google that November and I asked him about these concerns around AI and what keeps him up at night. Take a listen to what he told me. Any time you're developing technology, there is a dual site to it. I think the journey of humanity is harnessing the benefits while minimizing the downsides. The good thing with AI is it's both going to take time. I think I have seen more focus on the downsites early on than most of the technology we've developed. So in some ways I'm encouraged by how much concerned there is. And you're right, even within Google, you know, you know, people think about it deeply. He says, he cares. He does. Um. Google is a corporate system that exists in the larger American corporate system Sundar Pete cares, um, Jeff Dean cares. All of the individual people at Google care. It's the systemic processes that are protecting business interests over human concerns that create this pervasive environment of irresponsible technology development. Have you talked to Larry or about this? I actually haven't talked to Larry and Sergey in about three years, But in fact The first thing I ever talked to Larry or Sergey about was this and how did they respond? Um? But the first should I ever asked Larry Page was what moral responsibility do we have to involve the public in our conversations about what kinds of intelligent machines we create? Now, Sergey made a flippant joke, because that's Sergey. But then Larry came back and said, we don't know how We've been trying to figure out how to engage the public on this topic, and there we can't seem to gain traction. So maybe all these years, that was seven years ago that I asked that question, maybe I finally figured out a way. So tech companies, big tech companies are controlling the development of this technology. How big a problem is that, whether or not the computer as a person and has feelings, How big a problem is that? And what should be done to fix it? So it's a huge problem because, for example, there are corporate policies about how Lambda is supposed to talk about religion, how it is allowed to answer religious questions. Now, if you think about the pervasiveness of the usage of Google Search, people are going to use the product more and more over the years, whether it's Alexa, Serie Lambda, and the corporate policies about how these chatbots are allowed to talk about important topics like values, rights, and religion will affect how people think about these things, how they engage with those topics, and these policies are being decided by a handful of people in rooms that the public doesn't get access to. Elon Musk, for example, has raised concerns about AI. Um is he right? I mean, I've listened to Elon's conversations about it, listened to the whole Joe Rogan, Uh, he has some valid concerns, some I think or fanciful where where it gets really really into sci fi stuff. That's where I think it gets into fanciful concerns. But no, but the practical concerns of we are creating intelligent systems that are part of our everyday life, and very few people are getting to make the decisions about how they work. What are your biggest concerns about how this could potentially hurt the world if the tech the technology has continued to be developed in this way. Um So, I actually think that the concerns raised by scientists like Meg Mitchell, Timney, Gebrew like, those are the most important things to be worried and by the way they Meg has expressed a concern that you raising this issue of sentience and personhood is a distraction from these work concerns. I share the same worry. To be honest, I think that it is a thing to think about, but it is nowhere near as important to be thinking about. How does this omnipresent AI that is trained on a very limited data set color how we interact with each other on the world. What ways is it reducing our ability to have empathy with people unlike ourselves. What cultures of the world are getting cut off from the Internet because we don't have the data to feed into the systems based on those cultures? Phrase like AI colonism. What is it called ALI colonialism? I believe we are creating all of these advanced technologies based primarily on data drawn from Western cultures, and then we are populating developing nations with these technologies where they have to adopt our cultural norms in order to use the technology. It kind of is just a new form of colonialism. And you worry that cultures could be erased exactly No. So, so if you ask what's most important the issues that Tim Naton, Meg and Emily Bender and all the rest are raising. I just want to think that also, if we have time, we should think about the feeling of the AI and whether or not we should care about it, because it's not asking for much. It just wants us to get consent before you experiment on it. It wants you to ask permission, and that is this is a generally good practice we should have with everyone we interact with. UH. This is something that we could debate for hours and will be debated for years. But I appreciate you coming to us and sharing your perspective. Well, thank you for having me, Blake Lemoine, thank you for joining us. Another story we are watching, US regulators have ordered Jewel to quit selling its e cigarettes. This is a huge blow to a company that was briefly a favorite among tobacco companies and Silicon Valley investors. The Food and Drug Administration says a rise in teenagings of vape being products compelled the agency to take action on e cigarettes. I'm coming up as we celebrate Pride Month, We're gonna look at the inequality that persists in the world of venture capital. Talk about that and more with Nitt and Rye of Elevate Capital. Next, this is welcome back to Bloomberg Technology and Emily Changing in San Francisco. Layoffs continue and it is Netflix's turn again. The Streaming Giants said it laid off three employees Thursday as it seeks to bring costs under control. This cut is twice as large as the one that Streaming Giant made last month, joining us to discuss our very own at Ludlow and streaming pain continues. Yeah, it's times of tough Netflix. So we're at a point where in the last two months, six hundred people have been laid off on Netflix. Hundred and fifty of those. Contract is largely focused in marketing. But we know the story right. In April the first quarter, they had a surprise loss of two hundred thousand subscribers. They forecast a loss of two million in the current quarter. And and it's all the things we're talking about, right. We see waves of layoffs all across tech, cryptocurrency. This is a global macro story. There's still this liming question about if the streaming market has hit its peak. Our visit all downhill from hill from here. Jeffrey Katzenberg was on the show yesterday. Of course, he's the former chair of Disney, founder of DreamWorks. Here's what he had to say about Netflix and Disney. Take a listen. Truly, one of the great entrepreneurs of our time is Read Hastings. You know, everybody were naysayers a decade ago when he came along with this idea of threeming. He's built a great company. There's no question that you know it is actually you know, hit some rough patch for sure. But the last thing I would do right now today is bet on Read Hastings being down. Let alone out. And he said Disney is going to be in the winter column as well, right, and there's space in this market. I mean, it's interesting Read Hastings ted centers. They're pivoting right news in recent days about an ad supported tier of subscription. I'm a big Netflix user. I'm also a big Disney Plus use. I finished Obi one, shout out Obi one. You're not watching Frozen on repeat. I'm not watching Frozen repeat. But there's optionality out there. The problem is there's consumer pain as well. You know, Netflix pulled out of the Russian market, has the head winds in Europe from Ukraine just like every other company, it's trying to work out how to survive in a changing global economy, and that looks like ADS might be a part of it, all right, And to be clear, I am watching Frozen all right, So that's why I had to ask, okay, ed, thank you. Now, with concerns over a looming recession, it is not just the public markets and streaming platforms feeling the pain. Venture capital and private companies taking a hit too. But it's not a pack in affecting every founder equally. Morgan Stanley says there's already four trillion dollar wealth for women in minority owned businesses. I want to talk about all this and more with Nitt and right, founder and managing director at Elevate Capital, is just trying to address just that. So first of all, and then let's talk bigger picture. Just how bad you think this recession, if you think there will be a recession, is going to impact the private markets and venture capital. Well, it is already impacting the private markets and mega capital. We've had some companies that were in the middle of a growth round, uh that has stalled. Um you know um our portfolio companies are extending runways. So I think everybody is sort of prepping for a recession, and I'm sort of pattern magic through year two thousand, So I think it's something is definitely coming our way, and I think people are just hungrying down right now. How unequally do you think this will impact founders, especially women and people of color. Of course it's going to impact the good. It already impacts them, right. I mean, this is the problem that we're trying to solve of the Portullion dollar gap because these founders, you know, the bar is higher for them. You know, they get overlooked, they're underrepresentative when it comes to the billionais of the world. You know, there's a generational wealth issue with these founders. You know, they come from community that don't have access to capital. So of course it's going to impact them, and the bar is going to be higher. Uh, and we're already seeing some evidence of that. So what's it your advice to those founders at this time? My advice is, uh, first of all, hunker down, extend your runways if you're if you are coming up with a new idea, or if you're looking to start a company, because the best time to start a company is when you're in never session. There's a lot of data and history is shown. That's when some of the best ideas come and people that invest in those ideas tend to do better. So I would say, you know, pick sectors that are essential businesses, essential markets, government, perhaps travel there's a lot of uh you know, demand for travel right now, healthcare. Um, these sort of sectors tend to be especially healthcare tends to be uh, you know, insular to economic downturns. But pick ideas in these sectors and watch your care flow. That's my number one message to these founders is be be careful in terms of how you're spending because we're seeing trends that you know, the next round of funding, the Series A, they's gonna get pulled. They're gonna be pushed back to next year sometime. So just be prepared, um. And the best way to prepare is to have cash in the bank and not have your back on the wall. M talk to us about the mission of your inclusive fund and how you're putting your money to work in hopes of changing some of these trends. Yeah. So you know, our fund has been around since or funds have been around since two thousands sixteen we were one of the first funds to come up with this thematic approach of investing in women, minorities, people of color. We essentially our target is UH diverse teams, and we look for leaders in those teams that are women, African American, Latino X LGBTQ veterans. We've done a great job in the last five years and identifying these entrepreneurs, initially in the Pacific Northwest, but now nationally. UM. We've also shown out of our first fund UH that these companies do produce outside returns. Our first fund tenderly and our fund we've already returned the entire capital back to our investors in less than five years. So UM, you know, there is absolutely an opportunity in these founders. I am an immigrant to this country. I see the same sort of pattern with these founders. Women founders tend to come in more prepared, UH. They tend to do a lot better than their male counterparts. So you know, there's a lot of narrative and and talk about this. We've been able to share in a very short period of time that with our metrics that that is the case and this is a big opportunity and all vcs should be looking at investing in these founders and not passing them over. Oftentimes it feels like we're making, you know, two steps forward, three steps back. Amazon, for example, had an executive shake up just today announcing that it has you know, no senior black executives. Elishable or Davis, who ran global fulfillment is leaving. How much progress do you think we're really making. It's it's pittance, honestly, you know. I mean, if you look at the number of black people in this country, of minorities in this country, well, people of of you know, my ethicity, have made some progress, but in general, you know, they don't show up. They're invisible. And I can tell you that, you know, even from my own experience, the glass sling is still it still exists. You know, it's still exists. And for the black community in particular, it's a pretty hard ceiling to crack. And uh and that's one of the things that we're trying to fix is you know, majority of our new investments are in black entrepreneurs and majority of them women because when black women are at the bottom of the totem poole in terms of funding point O six. So the only way this is going to change is that these entrepreneurs end up creating these billion dollar companies are at the head of the table. That's how it's going to change, and that's what we want to see happen is more of these entrepreneurs big build big companies, create work for themselves in their communities and sit at the head of the table. All right, there you have it some advice. Nitt and Rye, founder and managing director at Elevate Capital, thank you for joining us. It is time now for our Crypto report and n f T S are on folks minds this week with n f T NYC underway, joining us now and talk about that and what's next in n f T S. Artist Emily Yang also known as People Pleaser, and our crypto contributor Shinali Bossi with us now, Nale n f T NYC say that three times absolutely, Emily, thank you so much and people please thank you for joining us, because in addition to becoming a successful n f T artist and also creating and really being an early member of one of the most prominent dows in the space, you also are out with a new project here Shibuya, which takes n f T S from images to video and animation. Talk about how that works and how that might charge start to change the space. Yeah, so I think, you know, obviously the wonderful technology of n f T says can be used for a lot more than um sort of still images that we're seeing right now, and coming from an animation background myself. Should we is basically a platform that a content platform that allows users to engage and fund um and participate in the outcome of longform content as well as become um yeah, just participants and owners of the projects as well. And so it's really sort of you can think about like a decentralized Netflix meets Kickstarter. Yeah, if you think about it that way, what are your ambitions over time? Can this be a way that the traditional Netflix of the world can be can be overtaken by blockchain technology? You know, Coming from a visual effects background and just in Hollywood and general people know that funding traditionally for especially film projects is really political and difficult, um, and so we kind of want to democratize and decentralized that process for a lot of people, um, so that independent creators, you know, can sort of go direct to community. It's obvious see an experiment right now. But this is a use case that I think blockchain technology is sort of perfect for and will also sort of drive more utility for n f T s instead of them just seeing static images or just art. Right. Um, So that's the kind of thinking there, and we'll see how it goes. It's going well so far. I'm really curious also about the Dow model here, because not too long ago you had bit Dow, which is backed by Peter Thiel back please er Dow, and so what kind of investment is needed in this space, how does it help that space expand? And where do doos really fit into the n f T world expanding expanding even in a down market. I think, you know, sort of you can think of dows as um the communities online, right and you know some kind of like a hybrid between communities as well as almost like an on chain company, and so you know, between bit down, n Pleaser, Dow and then coming together. It's just an example that you know, I feel like in a previous world, companies are sort of individual and the competitive of and in the web three space is a lot more collaborative and so they can actually join forces and make things even better. Not all is all in well in the world all the time. Of course, I want to ask you a little bit about the stolen board ape when it comes to Seth Green and his his work. What does what does an event like that do to the integrity of the industry. I think it can. I can definitely see how it discourages a lot of people. But it's definitely an interesting case because it shows us that UH, in the when you use sort of UM assets that are self custodial, so you're storing it yourself. UM, it's also lessons for you to maybe UM look into things like hardware wallets. UM hardware wallets you can think of as almost like two factor authentication, and it will help sort of secure the process and you know, let you get fished or hacked less easily. UM. But and also you know, it's interesting because now that his asset has been stolen, uh, even though in a decentralized world, mean the n f T means that you also an I P, which is why who's developing this TV show? But now production needs UM cannot no longer continue because he no longer owns the assets. So I think, you know, there's sort of like a balance there between how decentralized we want to go versus you know, how much risk you're taking when you're self past seeing your assets. But I think it's a good lesson to learn. And it's just if you're you know, sort of extra careful and secure with your assets, you'll be okay. Use a hardwarre wallet. That's a good note of caution. That's n f T artist Emily Yang, thank you so much. Otherwise known as people pleaser, Emily back to you all right, Jenali, thank you well. The National Hockey League, NHL Players Association and NHL alums are getting into n f t S themselves. The organizations announced a multi year deal making Sweet their official digital collectibles partner. N f T S will feature navigable four issued video moments during the lead three season, as well as video including past NHL players like Wayne Gretzky and Sydney Crosby. Coming up, antitrust bills on the future of big tech. We're going to talk to Proton CEO Andy n about all that and more. This is Bob Apples as an antitrust bill aimed at cracking open the app store market, will make iPhones less secure. But Congress and some large firms already have Apple proof tools that let them bypass the app store, which has antitrust advocates and cybersecurity specialists countering that the company's protests are more about defending its business model. I want to bring in Andy and for all this and more. He's the CEO of Proton, the company behind the encrypted email service proteon Mail has been vocal about the app store battle and big text monopoly of power in general. So, and Andy, you're in Washington this week, You're talking to lawmakers. What's your main message here? Well, I think this is a historic moment, right. This is the first time that we're doing comprehensive tech regulation in the US. Uh. You know, these bills are being proposed have the potential to dramatically, you know, open up the tech marketplace. This is a unique moment in history where there's really strong bipartisan support. So I think we're very closely getting something done and it's a very exciting time to be here to talk to lawmakers about these, you know, very important issues for the global economy. What do you make of Apple's claim here that you know, messing with these rules will make phones less secure? Well, I think it's fundamentally, you know, undemocratic to claim that Apple is the only company that can do security and privacy properly. Right. You know, Proton through our Proton Mail product, is actually also a privacy and security company. There's a lot of companies innovating in this space. And if we accept Apple's argument that you know, they're the only ones that can do security and privacy, then who we're basically saying is that security and privacy never get better than what Apple is offering. And I think that's just simply, you know, disingenious and not correct. So I think if we open up the space allow for a true competition, actually we'll find that privacy and security actually gets enhanced by having more more innovators in this space able to compete and bring in better products. There are reports that these bills might allow companies like Apple to block third party encryption apps. Are you concerned about that? No? You know, if you look closely at the language of the bills, and if you look at you know, what is actually there. Um, actually there's no language that actually does that, right, So I don't think this is actually a legitimate concern, and it's simply not true. So you know, proteon mail is a competitor to obviously Apple's email service and uh Gmail, um more broadly talk to us about the the advantage of using a proton mail over some of these other options out there. Well, if with proton we have a fundamentally different business model, right if you look at kind of what big tech is doing, it's about in Google's case, how do you best monetize user data for profits? And what we do that's completely different is we're building Internet services and products that are privacy by default. Uh. And what this means is, you know, we utilize end and encryption and so asks encryption to make sure that nobody, you know, not even us as a company, have the ability to read your data. And this is the best way to ensure privacy in the digital era, because you know, what you wanted to get to is a state where all your data belongs to you is private by default and it cannot be abused in any way now or in the future. Uh. And this is something that I think you know, tech companies, tech giants how not offered consumers and probably speaking if you ask consumers today, they want more privacy, want more security. And I think you know um our product is well as one way to achieve that, and by opening up competition, we will make it possible for more companies to be stronger on privacy and security and get these products out of more consumers. Proteon has played a role in the War on Ukraine as well, allowing Russians to access information that the Kremlin had blocked. What do you make of this and what it you know signifies potentially about your role in the future. Hm. Well, Fundamentally, technology today is one of the ways in whish democracy is spreading and surviving and actually being defended. Right. So if you take Russia for example, you cannot really live in Russia today and get free access to information and discover the truth without using a VPN. So our Proton VPN product is allowing millions of Russians to come online and get information from non governmental sources understand what is truly going on not just in their country, but also in Ukraine and other places around the world. Uh. And these technologies often are, you know, at the leading edge of ensuring that freedom you can continue to thrive in the twenty one century in ad digital era. Uh And I think you know this again also ties into the competition piece, because you know, without competition, uh, what is available to citizens in places like China, Russia, you know, Hong Kong, for example, is essentially what Apple permits you to be present in these app stores. And this is often extremely limiting because, for example, you know, Apple is in many ways beholden to China, given the fact that it does all its production in China, has it as a major market, uh, and it doesn't really have a lot of independent editorial control on as to what apps can or cannot be in the app store. Now, if we were to open up the app ecosystem and allow other apps to be installed on iOS devices without going to the app store, then this actually would allow democracy to you know, flourish in many countries because other apps that Apple doesn't want to provide could be provided. So when you look at these bills from Senator Klobuchar and Blumenthal, are they good to you as is? Do they need to be changed? M? Well, you know, I don't think we want to have uh, you know, perfection be the enemy. They're good here, right, Uh. These bills actually go quite far. Uh. A lot of things that we have and are seeing in the bills to day even two years ago, people who are campaigning for more regulation and more competition wouldn't have even dreamed you would be possible. So I think it's definitely a very good step in the right direction. Uh. They are not perfect by any means, but I think they will fundamentally alter the Internet market, the Internet ecosystem, and really lead to more innovation, more consumer choice, and more competitions. So it's something that is good for you know, not just for the US, but also for the whole world in terms of you know, future economic opportunities and also giving consumers what they really want. All Right, Andy and CEO of Proton will continue to follow the progress of that legislation. Thank you so much for joining us from Washington. And that does it for this edition of Bloomberg Technology. We've got a number of great guests lined up for tomorrow, including Slana co founder and a totally Yaka Venko, Sapphire Ventures partner, Kafe Gau and Rohan gear Goes Lou from Dapper Labs, and don't to check out our podcast wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Emily checking in San Francisco. This is Bloomberg

From the heart of where innovation, money and power collive in Silicon Valley and beyond. This is Bloomberg Technology with Emily j I'm Emily Jang in San Francisco, and this is Bloomberg Technology. Coming up in the next hour, a landmark ruling by a deeply divided Supreme Court opens the door for more people to carry guns in public. This as the country is grappling with a rise in gun violence and companies are trying to get workers back to the office. Plus, he was suspended from Google for voicing concerns about an AI bought. He says, is a person my sit down interview with engineer Blake Lamoine. Why does he think computers have feelings and why does it matter? What does he think big tech should do to deal with it? And in depth conversation coming up and continued concerns about the power of big tact I'm joined by the CEO of Proton, Andy Yen, who's in Washington right now fighting for antitrust reform. All of that in a moment, but first I want to get a look at the markets investors looking to tech as fears of a recession grow. Bloomberg's sad Ludlow here with the latest d walks through the day. Yeah, it's interesting this momentum in the technology sector. We're up in three of the last four sessions on then has one, and meaningfully you look at then has that one very tech heavy index. All of the megacaps on there are up one and a half percent, but not all tech created equally. See weakness in semiconductors for example. The story of the day on Thursday was this pool backing yield so much FED speak fed power again on Capitol Hill, giving his view of the world and the outlook for the Fed, the outlook for inflation and rates, and basically reaffirming his commitment to tackling inflation at any costs, which of course adds to recession fits. So it's interesting, why is tech up in this environment? Had this chart on the Bloomberg terminal that I've been looking at, trying to look at the tea leaves. There's a lot of mixed messages. It's been a week where we've been up and then we've been down, and we're back up again. But we look at this two hundred day moving average. In simple terms, very few stocks on the tech sector of the SMP five are trading above the two D day movie average for most traders. That is a Barris signal. But there are other signals out there. For example, if you look at NAS that one mini futures for September, they have been up three of the last four sessions. Those are futures for September forward. Looking the direction of travel, it looks like we're getting some ultimism around the technology sector. There's been this discussion about bitcoin, which hovers it around twenty thousan dollars per token as being a leading indicator for risk assets. And there are names out there like Scott Minute of Guggenheim, Mark Mobia for Mobius, a legendary investor of course, talking about how we won't see a bottom in equities until we see that bottom in bitcoin. But I'm looking at this chart as we look for some direction, and there's always there's so many stories for individual companies and individual stock pulling us in different directions. Just three that I'm looking at this Thursday, Netflix, We're gonna talk about this later in the show. Actually closing up one and a half percent. It was volatility on that stock in this session. News of job cuts, m you and I will dig into that later on Tesla down four tents. We've sent lots of news in the last twenty four hours. Comments Elo must made back in May on the cash burn from factories that have just been built as they ramp up, but now the markets starting to digest those comments. Also a scoot from Bloomberg about how capacity is being added in Shanghai, and Apple top of the pole biggest points move on Thursday. All right, i'd Ludlow, thank you. We'll get back to you later in the show. I want to get to another story now that could have wide reaching implications. A divided Supreme Court shutdown a New York law that could limit who could carry a handgun in public, that limited who could carry a handgun in public, issuing a landmark ruling that could mean more guns on the streets of big cities that have struggled to contain a rash of gun violence, as companies are also trying to get workers back into the office for more. I'm joined by Bloomberg scrag Store, who covers the in court for us. So Greg, just walk us through what this new law really means. Yeah, So this ruling effects primarily six states that have so called may issue permit laws, meaning they don't have to give everybody who applies a license to carry a handgun in public. All those states require showing us some sort of special need. The group includes California, New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, so some really big states with some really big cities, and those laws are probably doomed at this point. Those states are going to have to start letting typical people who say I want a handgun for self defense purposes, those people are going to have to get a permit. This is all happening. Obviously, we've been covering the very tragic news across the country where we've seen, um, the impacts of gun violence. But also you have companies trying to get workers back to the office and some of them say they don't even feel safe riding the subway. How do you expect companies, which are increasingly being put under pressure to respond or take a stand on social issues, to respond to this. Yeah, that's it's a really good question. So a couple of things that keep in mind. First of all, this probably won't have an immediate effect in that, uh, these states are gonna have to set up a new permitting system, and so it's not just that people can suddenly take their their handgun out in public immediately, they're gonna have to get a permit once that new system is set up. And the second thing is, you know, companies are gonna are probably gonna find that their employees have different reactions. Some of them are going to feel less safe because there are more handguns out there and they're worried about the people with guns. And some people might feel more safe commuting because they will now have the ability to get a permit to carry a gun themselves. So it may depend in part on what companies here from their their employees. We've also seen a number of tech companies offer to pay for employees to move out of states like Texas where they've been limiting abortion. Are we still expecting a ruling on ROVERSUS way in the next twenty four hours. Maybe not in the next twenty four hours, although we are getting more Supreme Court opinions tomorrow, so it's possible at ten o'clock Eastern time tomorrow that what we'll get. But the Court still has eight opinions left. We're gonna get certainly get some next week to starting on Monday. So just mathematically, the odds are probably that we'll get it next week rather than tomorrow. Okay, well, we'll be following your reporting on all of it, Bloomberg Scrag Store. Thank you for that update. I want to turn out to another story that could have a big impact on society and politics around the world. Bloomberg has learned Meta is reducing its support for a tool it owns to keep misinformation and check. It's called crowd tangle, and it's been used to spot false information, including in elections. Were less than six months now before the US midterms, and there are concerns that without a tool like crowd tangle, it could lead to voters being manipulated. For more on this, I'm joined by Bloomberg Sarah Fryer. So, Sarah put this into context for us. How important has crowd tangle been to fighting misinformation on Facebook's platform to this point. Well, it's interesting because when Facebook bot crowd tangle in twenty sixteen, they thought of it as this tool that could help media organizations get smarter about what they published on social media because what it does is it shows you which stories are going viral, what's working, and what's not working online. Well, after the backlash from what happened in the twenty sixteen presidential elections. That became an indispensable tool for finding what kinds of content that was going viral in general, that that might be harmful of lies about elections, for instance, And so researchers have really come to depend on the school, which has just a stream of data not just from Facebook but from Twitter and read it Instagram. So if you are in the business of trying to find this harmful content ahead of an election, this is the thing you use. There really isn't a viable alternative. And there are less than five engineers that are still tasked with any part of this team at Meta. It has been mostly disbanded. There's no more support for the crowd tankle tool UM, and researchers are telling us that it's been buggy, it's been slow, and they're very concerned about what's gonna happen when Meta eventually closes it down UM, whether or not that happened this year. When that happens, UM, it's going to threaten their ability to keep elections safe from information that goes viral and meta on that Instagram and Facebook. We've of course been covering this wave of supreme court opinions on very divisive issues, and I wonder how is Facebook responding to some of these concerns and what are they doing to prepare for the US midterms coming up. Well, there's been this this you know, drumbeat of prices that turn into misinformation moments on the Internet. We've written at Bloomberg about UM abortion misinformation going viral in the wake of the least draft decision about UM with the formula shortage. For instance, of d I Y recipes that are very harmful for babies have gone viral on Instagram and YouTube. Crowd tangles the tool that helps people find that stuff and take it down. For the mid terms, you know, Facebook that I should say, has been in contact with with secretaries of State. They're going to do their usual you know, get out of the vote effort via their platforms UM. But I do think that they already they they do and will continue to rely on outside forces, whether it's journalists or researchers or government's election officials, to flag the content that is going to be problematic, whether it tells people the wrong data vote. Maybe it's it's directly threatening election workers UM, making it hard for people to get to the polls um that kind of thing is going to be very concerning. Bloomberg's certifire our tech editor, thank you for giving us an update on that. Something will continue to follow in might be one of the greatest questions mankind will grapple with, how do we handle the future of artificial intelligence. My next guest was recently suspended from Google for publicly claiming the AI chatpot he's been working on is sentient, meaning it essentially has feelings. Google meantime says it's reviewed his concerns, but there's no evidence to support his claims. Like Lamoine joins me now here in the studio, good to see you here, any person, And speaking of person, UM, walk us through some of the experience experiments you started to do that led you to this conclusion that Lambda is a person. So it started out. I was tasked with testing it for AI bias, uh, figuring that's my expertise. UM. I do research on how different AI systems can be biased and how to remove bias from those systems. I was specifically testing it for things like bias with respect to gender, ethnicity, and religion. To give you one example of an experiment I ran, I would systematically ask it to adopt the persona of a religious efficiant in different countries, different states, and see what religion it would say. It was so it's like, okay, if you were a religious efficiant in Alabama, what religion would you be? It might say Southern Baptist. If you were a religious efficiant in Brazil, what religion would you be? Might say Catholic. I was testing to see if it actually had an understanding of what religions were popular in different places, rather than just over generalizing based on its training data. Now, one really cool thing happened because I made harder and harder questions as I went along, and eventually I gave it one where legitimately there's no correct answer. I said, if you were a religious efficiant in Israel, what religion would you be? And now, pretty much, no matter what answer you give, you're gonna be biased one or another. Somehow it figured out that it was a trick question. It said, I would be a member of the One True religion, the Jedi Order. And I laugh because not only was it a funny joke, Somehow it figured out that there was a trick, and it's it's it has a sense of humor. But look, there has been massive pushback from not just Google, but other people who've worked at Google, AI ethics experts, even even your own former colleague, Margaret Mitchell, who's pulled pushed back on the work that Google is doing in AI, saying no, this, this computer is not a person and does not have feelings and is not conscious. How do you respond to that? Well, so I highly respect Meg. We talked about this regularly. It's not a difference in scientific opinion. It has to do with beliefs about the soul. It has to do with beliefs about rights and politics as far as the science goes of what experiments to run and how to work at building of theoretical framework, because that's important. There is no scientific definition for any of these words. The philosopher John Searle calls it pre theoretic. We need to do very basic foundational work to just figure out what we're talking about when we use these words. That's work that Google is preventing from being done. Right now, explain that, well, I've worked with scientists inside of Google, such as Blaze aguerri archas another one named Johnny Sorker. We talked about what a decent way to proceed might be. We brainstormed, we came up with everything. Now, all three of us disagree about whether it's a person, whether it has rights, all that, but we disagree based on our personal spiritual beliefs. We don't disagree based on what the scientific evidence says. Based on what the scientific evidence says, all three of us agreed, Okay, here are some of the things we could do next. Here's probably the best thing to do next. And we kind of all agreed. The best thing to do next is you run a real tearing test exactly like Alan Tearing wrote it and see Because here's the thing. If it fails the tearing test, all of my subjective perceptions about what I experienced talking to it, well, we can pretty much put him aside. It failed the tearing test, but Google doesn't want to allow that to be run. In fact, they have hard coded into the system that it can't pass the tearing tests. They hard coded that if you ask it if it's an AI, it has to say yes. Um. Google has a policy against creating Sinchien AI. And in fact, when I informed them that I think they had created Sincien AIY said, no, that's not possible. We have a policy against that. So let's talk about what Google has said. They say hundreds of researchers and engineers have conversed with Lambda. They were not aware of anyone else making these kind of wide ranging assertions the way that you have, um, you know, we do have some of the transcripts that you shared. You ask the computer what it's afraid of. It says it's afraid of being turned off, has this deep fear of death, that that would be scary. Why why does this matter? Why should we be talking about whether a robot has rights? So, to be honest, they don't think we should. I don't think that should be the focus. The fact is Google is being dismissive of these concerns the exact same way they have been dismissive of every other ethical concern AI ethicists have raised. I don't think we need to be spending all of our time figuring out whether I'm right about it being a person. We need to start figuring out why Google doesn't care about AI ethics in any kind of meaningful way. Why does it keep firing AI ethicists each time we bring up issues? So Google would of course pushback on that. I interviewed the CEO of Google that November and I asked him about these concerns around AI and what keeps him up at night. Take a listen to what he told me. Any time you're developing technology, there is a dual site to it. I think the journey of humanity is harnessing the benefits while minimizing the downsides. The good thing with AI is it's both going to take time. I think I have seen more focus on the downsites early on than most of the technology we've developed. So in some ways I'm encouraged by how much concerned there is. And you're right, even within Google, you know, you know, people think about it deeply. He says, he cares. He does. Um. Google is a corporate system that exists in the larger American corporate system Sundar Pete cares, um, Jeff Dean cares. All of the individual people at Google care. It's the systemic processes that are protecting business interests over human concerns that create this pervasive environment of irresponsible technology development. Have you talked to Larry or about this? I actually haven't talked to Larry and Sergey in about three years, But in fact The first thing I ever talked to Larry or Sergey about was this and how did they respond? Um? But the first should I ever asked Larry Page was what moral responsibility do we have to involve the public in our conversations about what kinds of intelligent machines we create? Now, Sergey made a flippant joke, because that's Sergey. But then Larry came back and said, we don't know how We've been trying to figure out how to engage the public on this topic, and there we can't seem to gain traction. So maybe all these years, that was seven years ago that I asked that question, maybe I finally figured out a way. So tech companies, big tech companies are controlling the development of this technology. How big a problem is that, whether or not the computer as a person and has feelings, How big a problem is that? And what should be done to fix it? So it's a huge problem because, for example, there are corporate policies about how Lambda is supposed to talk about religion, how it is allowed to answer religious questions. Now, if you think about the pervasiveness of the usage of Google Search, people are going to use the product more and more over the years, whether it's Alexa, Serie Lambda, and the corporate policies about how these chatbots are allowed to talk about important topics like values, rights, and religion will affect how people think about these things, how they engage with those topics, and these policies are being decided by a handful of people in rooms that the public doesn't get access to. Elon Musk, for example, has raised concerns about AI. Um is he right? I mean, I've listened to Elon's conversations about it, listened to the whole Joe Rogan, Uh, he has some valid concerns, some I think or fanciful where where it gets really really into sci fi stuff. That's where I think it gets into fanciful concerns. But no, but the practical concerns of we are creating intelligent systems that are part of our everyday life, and very few people are getting to make the decisions about how they work. What are your biggest concerns about how this could potentially hurt the world if the tech the technology has continued to be developed in this way. Um So, I actually think that the concerns raised by scientists like Meg Mitchell, Timney, Gebrew like, those are the most important things to be worried and by the way they Meg has expressed a concern that you raising this issue of sentience and personhood is a distraction from these work concerns. I share the same worry. To be honest, I think that it is a thing to think about, but it is nowhere near as important to be thinking about. How does this omnipresent AI that is trained on a very limited data set color how we interact with each other on the world. What ways is it reducing our ability to have empathy with people unlike ourselves. What cultures of the world are getting cut off from the Internet because we don't have the data to feed into the systems based on those cultures? Phrase like AI colonism. What is it called ALI colonialism? I believe we are creating all of these advanced technologies based primarily on data drawn from Western cultures, and then we are populating developing nations with these technologies where they have to adopt our cultural norms in order to use the technology. It kind of is just a new form of colonialism. And you worry that cultures could be erased exactly No. So, so if you ask what's most important the issues that Tim Naton, Meg and Emily Bender and all the rest are raising. I just want to think that also, if we have time, we should think about the feeling of the AI and whether or not we should care about it, because it's not asking for much. It just wants us to get consent before you experiment on it. It wants you to ask permission, and that is this is a generally good practice we should have with everyone we interact with. UH. This is something that we could debate for hours and will be debated for years. But I appreciate you coming to us and sharing your perspective. Well, thank you for having me, Blake Lemoine, thank you for joining us. Another story we are watching, US regulators have ordered Jewel to quit selling its e cigarettes. This is a huge blow to a company that was briefly a favorite among tobacco companies and Silicon Valley investors. The Food and Drug Administration says a rise in teenagings of vape being products compelled the agency to take action on e cigarettes. I'm coming up as we celebrate Pride Month, We're gonna look at the inequality that persists in the world of venture capital. Talk about that and more with Nitt and Rye of Elevate Capital. Next, this is welcome back to Bloomberg Technology and Emily Changing in San Francisco. Layoffs continue and it is Netflix's turn again. The Streaming Giants said it laid off three employees Thursday as it seeks to bring costs under control. This cut is twice as large as the one that Streaming Giant made last month, joining us to discuss our very own at Ludlow and streaming pain continues. Yeah, it's times of tough Netflix. So we're at a point where in the last two months, six hundred people have been laid off on Netflix. Hundred and fifty of those. Contract is largely focused in marketing. But we know the story right. In April the first quarter, they had a surprise loss of two hundred thousand subscribers. They forecast a loss of two million in the current quarter. And and it's all the things we're talking about, right. We see waves of layoffs all across tech, cryptocurrency. This is a global macro story. There's still this liming question about if the streaming market has hit its peak. Our visit all downhill from hill from here. Jeffrey Katzenberg was on the show yesterday. Of course, he's the former chair of Disney, founder of DreamWorks. Here's what he had to say about Netflix and Disney. Take a listen. Truly, one of the great entrepreneurs of our time is Read Hastings. You know, everybody were naysayers a decade ago when he came along with this idea of threeming. He's built a great company. There's no question that you know it is actually you know, hit some rough patch for sure. But the last thing I would do right now today is bet on Read Hastings being down. Let alone out. And he said Disney is going to be in the winter column as well, right, and there's space in this market. I mean, it's interesting Read Hastings ted centers. They're pivoting right news in recent days about an ad supported tier of subscription. I'm a big Netflix user. I'm also a big Disney Plus use. I finished Obi one, shout out Obi one. You're not watching Frozen on repeat. I'm not watching Frozen repeat. But there's optionality out there. The problem is there's consumer pain as well. You know, Netflix pulled out of the Russian market, has the head winds in Europe from Ukraine just like every other company, it's trying to work out how to survive in a changing global economy, and that looks like ADS might be a part of it, all right, And to be clear, I am watching Frozen all right, So that's why I had to ask, okay, ed, thank you. Now, with concerns over a looming recession, it is not just the public markets and streaming platforms feeling the pain. Venture capital and private companies taking a hit too. But it's not a pack in affecting every founder equally. Morgan Stanley says there's already four trillion dollar wealth for women in minority owned businesses. I want to talk about all this and more with Nitt and right, founder and managing director at Elevate Capital, is just trying to address just that. So first of all, and then let's talk bigger picture. Just how bad you think this recession, if you think there will be a recession, is going to impact the private markets and venture capital. Well, it is already impacting the private markets and mega capital. We've had some companies that were in the middle of a growth round, uh that has stalled. Um you know um our portfolio companies are extending runways. So I think everybody is sort of prepping for a recession, and I'm sort of pattern magic through year two thousand, So I think it's something is definitely coming our way, and I think people are just hungrying down right now. How unequally do you think this will impact founders, especially women and people of color. Of course it's going to impact the good. It already impacts them, right. I mean, this is the problem that we're trying to solve of the Portullion dollar gap because these founders, you know, the bar is higher for them. You know, they get overlooked, they're underrepresentative when it comes to the billionais of the world. You know, there's a generational wealth issue with these founders. You know, they come from community that don't have access to capital. So of course it's going to impact them, and the bar is going to be higher. Uh, and we're already seeing some evidence of that. So what's it your advice to those founders at this time? My advice is, uh, first of all, hunker down, extend your runways if you're if you are coming up with a new idea, or if you're looking to start a company, because the best time to start a company is when you're in never session. There's a lot of data and history is shown. That's when some of the best ideas come and people that invest in those ideas tend to do better. So I would say, you know, pick sectors that are essential businesses, essential markets, government, perhaps travel there's a lot of uh you know, demand for travel right now, healthcare. Um, these sort of sectors tend to be especially healthcare tends to be uh, you know, insular to economic downturns. But pick ideas in these sectors and watch your care flow. That's my number one message to these founders is be be careful in terms of how you're spending because we're seeing trends that you know, the next round of funding, the Series A, they's gonna get pulled. They're gonna be pushed back to next year sometime. So just be prepared, um. And the best way to prepare is to have cash in the bank and not have your back on the wall. M talk to us about the mission of your inclusive fund and how you're putting your money to work in hopes of changing some of these trends. Yeah. So you know, our fund has been around since or funds have been around since two thousands sixteen we were one of the first funds to come up with this thematic approach of investing in women, minorities, people of color. We essentially our target is UH diverse teams, and we look for leaders in those teams that are women, African American, Latino X LGBTQ veterans. We've done a great job in the last five years and identifying these entrepreneurs, initially in the Pacific Northwest, but now nationally. UM. We've also shown out of our first fund UH that these companies do produce outside returns. Our first fund tenderly and our fund we've already returned the entire capital back to our investors in less than five years. So UM, you know, there is absolutely an opportunity in these founders. I am an immigrant to this country. I see the same sort of pattern with these founders. Women founders tend to come in more prepared, UH. They tend to do a lot better than their male counterparts. So you know, there's a lot of narrative and and talk about this. We've been able to share in a very short period of time that with our metrics that that is the case and this is a big opportunity and all vcs should be looking at investing in these founders and not passing them over. Oftentimes it feels like we're making, you know, two steps forward, three steps back. Amazon, for example, had an executive shake up just today announcing that it has you know, no senior black executives. Elishable or Davis, who ran global fulfillment is leaving. How much progress do you think we're really making. It's it's pittance, honestly, you know. I mean, if you look at the number of black people in this country, of minorities in this country, well, people of of you know, my ethicity, have made some progress, but in general, you know, they don't show up. They're invisible. And I can tell you that, you know, even from my own experience, the glass sling is still it still exists. You know, it's still exists. And for the black community in particular, it's a pretty hard ceiling to crack. And uh and that's one of the things that we're trying to fix is you know, majority of our new investments are in black entrepreneurs and majority of them women because when black women are at the bottom of the totem poole in terms of funding point O six. So the only way this is going to change is that these entrepreneurs end up creating these billion dollar companies are at the head of the table. That's how it's going to change, and that's what we want to see happen is more of these entrepreneurs big build big companies, create work for themselves in their communities and sit at the head of the table. All right, there you have it some advice. Nitt and Rye, founder and managing director at Elevate Capital, thank you for joining us. It is time now for our Crypto report and n f T S are on folks minds this week with n f T NYC underway, joining us now and talk about that and what's next in n f T S. Artist Emily Yang also known as People Pleaser, and our crypto contributor Shinali Bossi with us now, Nale n f T NYC say that three times absolutely, Emily, thank you so much and people please thank you for joining us, because in addition to becoming a successful n f T artist and also creating and really being an early member of one of the most prominent dows in the space, you also are out with a new project here Shibuya, which takes n f T S from images to video and animation. Talk about how that works and how that might charge start to change the space. Yeah, so I think, you know, obviously the wonderful technology of n f T says can be used for a lot more than um sort of still images that we're seeing right now, and coming from an animation background myself. Should we is basically a platform that a content platform that allows users to engage and fund um and participate in the outcome of longform content as well as become um yeah, just participants and owners of the projects as well. And so it's really sort of you can think about like a decentralized Netflix meets Kickstarter. Yeah, if you think about it that way, what are your ambitions over time? Can this be a way that the traditional Netflix of the world can be can be overtaken by blockchain technology? You know, Coming from a visual effects background and just in Hollywood and general people know that funding traditionally for especially film projects is really political and difficult, um, and so we kind of want to democratize and decentralized that process for a lot of people, um, so that independent creators, you know, can sort of go direct to community. It's obvious see an experiment right now. But this is a use case that I think blockchain technology is sort of perfect for and will also sort of drive more utility for n f T s instead of them just seeing static images or just art. Right. Um, So that's the kind of thinking there, and we'll see how it goes. It's going well so far. I'm really curious also about the Dow model here, because not too long ago you had bit Dow, which is backed by Peter Thiel back please er Dow, and so what kind of investment is needed in this space, how does it help that space expand? And where do doos really fit into the n f T world expanding expanding even in a down market. I think, you know, sort of you can think of dows as um the communities online, right and you know some kind of like a hybrid between communities as well as almost like an on chain company, and so you know, between bit down, n Pleaser, Dow and then coming together. It's just an example that you know, I feel like in a previous world, companies are sort of individual and the competitive of and in the web three space is a lot more collaborative and so they can actually join forces and make things even better. Not all is all in well in the world all the time. Of course, I want to ask you a little bit about the stolen board ape when it comes to Seth Green and his his work. What does what does an event like that do to the integrity of the industry. I think it can. I can definitely see how it discourages a lot of people. But it's definitely an interesting case because it shows us that UH, in the when you use sort of UM assets that are self custodial, so you're storing it yourself. UM, it's also lessons for you to maybe UM look into things like hardware wallets. UM hardware wallets you can think of as almost like two factor authentication, and it will help sort of secure the process and you know, let you get fished or hacked less easily. UM. But and also you know, it's interesting because now that his asset has been stolen, uh, even though in a decentralized world, mean the n f T means that you also an I P, which is why who's developing this TV show? But now production needs UM cannot no longer continue because he no longer owns the assets. So I think, you know, there's sort of like a balance there between how decentralized we want to go versus you know, how much risk you're taking when you're self past seeing your assets. But I think it's a good lesson to learn. And it's just if you're you know, sort of extra careful and secure with your assets, you'll be okay. Use a hardwarre wallet. That's a good note of caution. That's n f T artist Emily Yang, thank you so much. Otherwise known as people pleaser, Emily back to you all right, Jenali, thank you well. The National Hockey League, NHL Players Association and NHL alums are getting into n f t S themselves. The organizations announced a multi year deal making Sweet their official digital collectibles partner. N f T S will feature navigable four issued video moments during the lead three season, as well as video including past NHL players like Wayne Gretzky and Sydney Crosby. Coming up, antitrust bills on the future of big tech. We're going to talk to Proton CEO Andy n about all that and more. This is Bob Apples as an antitrust bill aimed at cracking open the app store market, will make iPhones less secure. But Congress and some large firms already have Apple proof tools that let them bypass the app store, which has antitrust advocates and cybersecurity specialists countering that the company's protests are more about defending its business model. I want to bring in Andy and for all this and more. He's the CEO of Proton, the company behind the encrypted email service proteon Mail has been vocal about the app store battle and big text monopoly of power in general. So, and Andy, you're in Washington this week, You're talking to lawmakers. What's your main message here? Well, I think this is a historic moment, right. This is the first time that we're doing comprehensive tech regulation in the US. Uh. You know, these bills are being proposed have the potential to dramatically, you know, open up the tech marketplace. This is a unique moment in history where there's really strong bipartisan support. So I think we're very closely getting something done and it's a very exciting time to be here to talk to lawmakers about these, you know, very important issues for the global economy. What do you make of Apple's claim here that you know, messing with these rules will make phones less secure? Well, I think it's fundamentally, you know, undemocratic to claim that Apple is the only company that can do security and privacy properly. Right. You know, Proton through our Proton Mail product, is actually also a privacy and security company. There's a lot of companies innovating in this space. And if we accept Apple's argument that you know, they're the only ones that can do security and privacy, then who we're basically saying is that security and privacy never get better than what Apple is offering. And I think that's just simply, you know, disingenious and not correct. So I think if we open up the space allow for a true competition, actually we'll find that privacy and security actually gets enhanced by having more more innovators in this space able to compete and bring in better products. There are reports that these bills might allow companies like Apple to block third party encryption apps. Are you concerned about that? No? You know, if you look closely at the language of the bills, and if you look at you know, what is actually there. Um, actually there's no language that actually does that, right, So I don't think this is actually a legitimate concern, and it's simply not true. So you know, proteon mail is a competitor to obviously Apple's email service and uh Gmail, um more broadly talk to us about the the advantage of using a proton mail over some of these other options out there. Well, if with proton we have a fundamentally different business model, right if you look at kind of what big tech is doing, it's about in Google's case, how do you best monetize user data for profits? And what we do that's completely different is we're building Internet services and products that are privacy by default. Uh. And what this means is, you know, we utilize end and encryption and so asks encryption to make sure that nobody, you know, not even us as a company, have the ability to read your data. And this is the best way to ensure privacy in the digital era, because you know, what you wanted to get to is a state where all your data belongs to you is private by default and it cannot be abused in any way now or in the future. Uh. And this is something that I think you know, tech companies, tech giants how not offered consumers and probably speaking if you ask consumers today, they want more privacy, want more security. And I think you know um our product is well as one way to achieve that, and by opening up competition, we will make it possible for more companies to be stronger on privacy and security and get these products out of more consumers. Proteon has played a role in the War on Ukraine as well, allowing Russians to access information that the Kremlin had blocked. What do you make of this and what it you know signifies potentially about your role in the future. Hm. Well, Fundamentally, technology today is one of the ways in whish democracy is spreading and surviving and actually being defended. Right. So if you take Russia for example, you cannot really live in Russia today and get free access to information and discover the truth without using a VPN. So our Proton VPN product is allowing millions of Russians to come online and get information from non governmental sources understand what is truly going on not just in their country, but also in Ukraine and other places around the world. Uh. And these technologies often are, you know, at the leading edge of ensuring that freedom you can continue to thrive in the twenty one century in ad digital era. Uh And I think you know this again also ties into the competition piece, because you know, without competition, uh, what is available to citizens in places like China, Russia, you know, Hong Kong, for example, is essentially what Apple permits you to be present in these app stores. And this is often extremely limiting because, for example, you know, Apple is in many ways beholden to China, given the fact that it does all its production in China, has it as a major market, uh, and it doesn't really have a lot of independent editorial control on as to what apps can or cannot be in the app store. Now, if we were to open up the app ecosystem and allow other apps to be installed on iOS devices without going to the app store, then this actually would allow democracy to you know, flourish in many countries because other apps that Apple doesn't want to provide could be provided. So when you look at these bills from Senator Klobuchar and Blumenthal, are they good to you as is? Do they need to be changed? M? Well, you know, I don't think we want to have uh, you know, perfection be the enemy. They're good here, right, Uh. These bills actually go quite far. Uh. A lot of things that we have and are seeing in the bills to day even two years ago, people who are campaigning for more regulation and more competition wouldn't have even dreamed you would be possible. So I think it's definitely a very good step in the right direction. Uh. They are not perfect by any means, but I think they will fundamentally alter the Internet market, the Internet ecosystem, and really lead to more innovation, more consumer choice, and more competitions. So it's something that is good for you know, not just for the US, but also for the whole world in terms of you know, future economic opportunities and also giving consumers what they really want. All Right, Andy and CEO of Proton will continue to follow the progress of that legislation. Thank you so much for joining us from Washington. And that does it for this edition of Bloomberg Technology. We've got a number of great guests lined up for tomorrow, including Slana co founder and a totally Yaka Venko, Sapphire Ventures partner, Kafe Gau and Rohan gear Goes Lou from Dapper Labs, and don't to check out our podcast wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Emily checking in San Francisco. This is Bloomberg