vision fund. oh, snap. bullish bets payoff. four more users per day than percted far more users day than expected but can growth keep up? department of justice is set to open a broad antitrust review into big tech. they are looking specifically into whether u.s. tech companies hurto big that they competition. joining us to discuss, tom got gurman, and, mark ben rhody in washington. ben: we don t know a whole lot. we are looking at here is a sort of complement to a task force that the federal trade commission announced. doj share antitrust oversight. what is especially interesting that theye believed had split up the companies, the doj would only be looking at google and apple. now it looks like they could be looking at something more high-level. they could be doing criminal referrals to other parts of the agency. these companies could be facing scrutiny from both agencies. emily: the doj had taken oversight over alphabet and apple. the ftc was going to be looking at faceboo
snap, bullish bets pay off as the social media company far more users coming back on a daily basis, but can the growth keep happening? the u.s. department of justice is poised to open a broad antitrust review into big tech, putting off of it, and facebook in the spotlight. regulators are looking at whether tech companies are so big they stifle competition. this ratchets up pressure on tech giants facing scrutiny from europe to capitol hill. joining us to discuss are a bloomberg tech executive editor, our bloomberg tech reporter who covers apple, and ben brody who covers tech s corporate influence for bloomberg in washington. what do we know? well, not a whole lot. i think what we are looking at complement toof the task force the federal trade commission announced. the ftc and the doj share antitrust oversight. i think we are looking at a complementary task horse. is especially interesting as we had believed that doj and ftc had split up the companies. at doj would only be l
capable of opening hundreds of millions of locks. guest: i think there is a lot of hyperbole in mr. cook s letter. the existence, we like the analogy. the truth is when you look at physical world, all sorts of private information exists in the physical world, medical records, business records. where those records are stored law enforcement with a warrant can access that evidence. it is available. there are keys to physical doors. there are keys to safe deposit boxes and also, private companies are required to comply with warrants in order to access even locked physical devices n this instance they re, the fbi is asking for, asking for with a magistrate s order apple to simply unlock their own device. this is technology, these are technical means they have admitted that they have at their disposal already. guest: if i could push back on that though. that is different. we re not asking them to unlock a device. they do not have right now a key in their position. what is bein
there were 18 mills by the 1830 s. it became known as the textile center of the world. the mills started down here in the south because of the abundance of water power. secondly, because of the abundance of people and employees, potential employees, and also, the obvious reason, cotton. there was plenty of short staple cotton everywhere. these men who decided to go into the textile industry had no experience whatsoever. they just decided to create these gigantic mills. the other thing that makes this very interesting is that these men got together as partnerships and that is so unlike anywhere else in the world because they competed with each other and yet, they partnered with each other, they served on each other s boards. these men decided to build an empire together and they also decided to build greenville. the history museum is a wonderful place, and it is a wonderful place because it pays homage to where greenville really started, and especially the textile industry, th
dustin boltz. let s begin with you. is this issue we are currently discussing about the iphone and terrorism a classic case of security versus privacy? it is more a case of security versus security. concerned about this issue of privacy on the device that s when that will come back and bite apple users. i see it on the mentally as a challenge to that proper balance because there is a tool at play and the tool is a device that was intentionally designed to be impenetrable. we believe it threatens the way that our search and seizure laws were designed to operate. reasonable searches under lawful warrant can obtain access to evidence. we do view it as a threat to the fulcrum that the balance of security sits on. tim cook writes about this issue. the government suggests it would only be used once on one phone. that is not true. it could be used over and over again on any number of devices. it would be the equivalent of a master key capable of opening hundreds of million