tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg February 29, 2016 7:00pm-8:01pm EST
charlie: we begin with our continuing coverage of the encryption debate. twitter, andogle, yahoo! moved to throw their support behind apple. the fbi director james comey calling encryption the hardest problem i have seen in government. joining me now is max levchin. he is currently the cofounder and ceo of a firm at a financial
and technology company. -- me ask a broad question let me ask a broader question. we've seen this coming? tell me more. directorer the fbi comey has advocated for essentially back during -- yption software that is a terrible idea. there are simple things to it, bad guys do not abide by our laws, good guys will weaken encryption which bad guys will take advantage of. will have weak systems and bad guys we use the strongest things they can get their hands on. that is easy. emily: bed --
charlie: bad guys can be criminals and nationstates. >> anyone. us will have hurt knowledge that we have weakened our systems and enacted laws to make sure everyone uses those. you can make the argument that will be safeguarded with legal protections, but we have seen what happened with the break-ins from target to the government break-ins. weakening security is a fundamentally terrible idea. it is there or not. even if slightly weakened, it does not exist. this particular case is not exactly the same thing. here, the government has asked apple not just hand over data that they happen to have. they are saying we know you do not have this data, we want you that opens there
phone and gives data to us. he is a known terrorist and a bad guy. it is one timeay only and we are not trying to open the back door. we have a problem with how people interpret keywords. , the realityately .s that this is a complex issue people conflate the two issues. precedent and legal issue that apple and fbi are digging out. charlie: why is that true? max: the software can be built. does not have it, they can sit
down and build it. it may be a burden, but they can do it. tim cook is saying, if the fbi can compel me to build software that opens up the phones of my customers, they will not stop. so apple says, we can build the software to open the phone. ok, open it but then destroy the software. i am keeping here for a moment the idea that someone else may come and say, i know that you destroy that, but do it for us. we have a mass murderer. if we can get inside it will tell us stuff. max: right. the more scary wrinkle is they don't say open up the phone. they said we have a case with probable cause and a scary thing going on.
we need to turn on cameras on every laptop or every phone. charlie: are they saying that? saying ifut apple is there is precedent for a government organization can save , -- can say, build software to allow us to spy on their citizens, who is to say it will not happen again? they say you can compel us to do this but it has to be in the open. there has to be a law. charlie: this is the perfect case to decide a supreme court decision or a congressional l aw. max: right. there is one more thing. beyond legal precedent which apple is not saying, we build this tool and this exists. it is a company with several hundred thousand employees.
there will be people involved. this tool is terrifying and will exist. as the world knows this tool is being built that you do not have every imaginable bad actor saying we will do what it takes to get our hands on the two of -- tool. as soon as we do, some other agent grabbing this tool while it is in existence, using for their own purposes. apple wants a legal hearing that says it must exist under the following framework of the law and that is how usage can and cannot happen. not want thee does responsibility without somebody having said these are the rules and this is the way will do this ? max: i believe that is the purpose. not authorized to speak on behalf of anyone.
charlie: i brought you here because you know and understand it very well and understand computer science very well. i only have my curiosity. , back to this one phone. wait until it works its way through the court? year.ay take a do we wait for the national debate? what happens to the phone that information because we know there's information that might lead to other plots against america? emotionalis where my
parent, husband, family person selfand civil liberties conflict. i hope it propels its way to the supreme court quickly. that the supreme court tells tom that you are compelled open the phone. i want to see this case for the if you are with every bit of evidence of a have access to what they need. that is fundamentally important to me. hand, it's critical that the supreme court say for this one phone you are compelled to open it and we have a 4-4 court which means that it does not set precedent. this is a particularly curious time.
the court can compel them to open this phone but it still goes in front of congress and we .till have a public debate do we want every phone opened by the supreme court? it is a little bit burdensome but that would ensure civil liberties. thatie: has been reported they are developing devices, iphones and future iphones that will even be harder to crack. max: yes. charlie: they say almost impossible. you would know more about that than i would. happens in the future to the need of law enforcement to have access to critical data?
liberties cases have to do with the right to privacy. it was raised after edward .nowden they made known of the transactions of the tibet have a reason to know. law enforcement has a legitimate .urpose in america it means they may have their constitutional restrictions on. law enforcement has the responsibility to do as much as it could. way fort there be a society to develop cause -- develop laws.
have to check it here and here and here and say under no circumstances can they do it because we can develop ways to can never do it. i think apple plans to build something that is effectively unbreakable is the right thing to do. it is most certainly the case that people trying to safeguard have access to software that is unbreakable. someone who is keen on protecting data knows how to do so and will do so. the fbi and the cia have used
exploitations and bugs in that practice will remain. that is not something we need to worry about. compelling the company to do something that puts them into a conflicted situation is conveniently sidestepped by not allowing this weakness to happen. charlie: apple does not want this decision. max: correct. what is really important is this point that if you weaken the system the bad guys will not be affected and the good guys will be weaker. apple says the same strength applies to everyone. it is generally a better outcome.
everyone was beating the drum saying we will not read the bad guys mail. chip is a debate i'm referring to. chipotion of a backdoor and all the computers that the nsa would have access to. it got blown out because civil liberties folks were protesting it. charlie: where our civil liberties when the fbi goes to a and says we have a court order to look at the financial records of this person and have gone through appropriate procedure to get it. in the past they have done it. problem thatthis
they may not have control of it. i think that is unlikely to change. here's ae paypal dublin agencies who say we need to see records of certain transactions because -- they say situation,paypal there were agencies who said, we need to see records of certain transactions the cousin or becauseisk here -- there is real risk here. if apple can be told, you need to do that -- problem ofat's the being asked to build something.
to create something. max: or hand over what they have. there is put the of precedent where a court order is given to an agency in the data must be handed over. apple has worked with law enforcement in the past. this is very new. charlie: james comey said the judge the code has directed apple to write works only on this one phone so the idea of it getting to the wild the experts tell me is not a real thing. that was james comey. respect to theue director of the fbi, between him and the judge, there are probably many layers of direction to how code works. it is possible to write code that works on one phone. is it closer to writing code that works on any phone? yes.
it is fundamentally a check in the code that says, is this the right phone? work here. charlie: could the smartest hacker in the world break into this phone without damaging the data? max: the favored reaction is no, but it might not be so. humans -- iost by is built by humans. it is possible there is a bug that apple does not know about that a smart hacker might already know about. but you build a new version of either wes and eliminate -- you build a new version of ios and eliminate the need for the key check -- apple could do this.
eliminate the temper chip, buts from the that doesn't require anybody's help. they could get in and get the key. of the major players are supportive of apple to one degree or another. i think what tim cook's peers -- charlie: we're talking google, the ceo of microsoft and others. max: these are companies that deal in data. they say that it is a hugely important matter. it is uncharted legal territory. we support tim cook asking congress to create a law that draws a clear line in the sand.
this is how this data is discoverable. public, soout in the it is clear to american people what will end what will not end up int he h the hands of the government. everyone is on the right side of this debate and what is important as private citizens, but they understand the long-term implications are profound. there is not question that the iphone 6, i assume the iphone seven is around the corner. [laughter] max: probably. charlie: tim cook makes the point that if there is a , a lot of peoplel trusted apple, believing they
were buying an encrypted phone. it goes to the heart of their credibility. do they have a point? especially in china, which has become their big market. there is a piece of this that is very relevant internationally, china in particular. where there is an entirely different type of due process and legal framework. apple has to be an international company, the have to cater to everyone in the world. they need clear standards. i suspect that plays into it. my guess is that in this case tim cook is fundamentally concerned with the u.s. side, but it cannot escape their attention it will have repercussions worldwide. charlie: you said you believe
there is a way to not have a master key, and do this one time. but you have changed your mind. was there one particular thing? was it tim cook's argument, that here and was involved it would do damage to the idea of privacy? max: there was a thing that he said in the interview which set off my mind on a path from black and white, bad guys phones need to be open, to my view today. he mentioned congress. this notion of checks and balances. of accountability and law enforcement is something our congress is in charge of. not having them involved is what made me think, this is fundamental.
this is something were a brand-new type of access is being discussed. we have no law around. that got me thinking about. charlie: ted olson made the point. we need a dialogue and the conversation. we need decision-making. this is one of those issues where maybe all the amount of law enforcement and the fbi working with apple would not have got to a solution. you need congress to come to grips with it, and the supreme court to do it. aboutave been talking encryption. the conversation has been going on for several years between apple and the government, especially when apple announced how successfully their encrypted devices were. technology terms of
and where we are going, and what is taking place in the marketplace, from your sense as a computer scientist, what is next? we have seen the dominance of mobile devices. the prevalence of the cloud. is certainly going to get more interesting. i think that we are going to have lots of debates. this not the last fight. charlie: in terms of the role of society? in thee role of law newly changed software infrastructure.
cloud means your data lives not on the computer that you currently have. there is a copy on a server. what used to be the link between you, law enforcement, and your data -- there is now a third party. that is unprecedented. we will find out what it means. charlie: here is what is interesting. those servers are owned by amazon, microsoft, apple. major companies. that is where the cloud is. max: exactly. timlie: my impression is, cook would have no problem if they accessed the cloud to get this information.
right because the data would already be there. there's a copy that exists. it does not need to be broken. there is an item that apple has in their possession and they have been compelled by court order to hand it over. that would not be difficult. in this case it is the government compelling apple to build software that can be used for good today, but tomorrow can be used for all kinds of surveillance that does not need to be announced or debated if the president is established that it is doable. they are asking to establish the precedent, tell us what it means. can we be forced to write software that is used to spy on our citizens by our government and other governments. ? saidie: it ought to be
that this country has survived and prevailed in the kind of nation it has been because of its respect. for constitutional principles. jackson and adams othericated with each after the u.s. was established, in encrypted form, because they were afraid of the postmaster general reading it and using it to blackmail them. charlie: back in a moment. ♪
>> terry mcauliffe is the 72nd governor of the great commonwealth of virginia. a former national party chair and prodigious fundraiser. one is closer in politics to bill and hillary clinton than terry mcauliffe. we will talk about virginia in a minute, but let's start with national politics. handicap the bernie-hillary race. what is it so tight? mcauliffe: he is promising
a lot of things that cannot happen. bere is zero chance it will put into law. takinglking about even the hard work that president obama did and promising everybody free health care. for a lot of folks, they hear that and it sounds great. you and i are older than dirt. it can never become law. young people like barack obama am a they like bill clinton, and they love bernie sanders. they don't like hillary clinton. they voted overwhelmingly for bernie sanders. you have five kids. why are young people turned off by hillary? gov. mcauliffe: i don't know if it is turned off by hillary as much as bernie sanders promising free college education. that is exciting. if you go back to 2004, we had governor dean with all the young folks.
everyone had the orange hats. we are just in the beginning of the process. we only had two contests. think that she could wrap this up by march 15? gov. mcauliffe: there is a real likelihood that we can announced statistically that he cannot win. this is exactly what president obama did -- al: exactly. how is this campaign different from the 2008 campaign? gov. mcauliffe: well robbie is the campaign manager, i am very biased, he was mine. they are a talented team. they know the mechanics. last time there was not even a delegate operation. robbie put together an operation to win delegates. to become the democratic nominee, you must win delegates. that is the plan he has put forward. this is the long haul.
we are running for president. al: there are some people who want to replace robbie, you think that would be a mistake? gov. mcauliffe: i have been in the clinton world tha longtime. it is not the easiest place to survive. it is a big conversation and everyone has an opinion. when you are up it is great, when you are not everyone has an idea. robbie has the mechanics in place. al: you talked about the sanders program agenda message being unrealistic. what is the hillary message? remember 1992, it is about the put on, what can hillary a bumper sticker? gov. mcauliffe: she is a progressive that gets results. she has been in the battle on children's health care and other issues -- her whole. life she has fought on these
issues she got out of yelp and and -- he got out of yale went to arkansas. she went to china as a first lady to talk about women's issues. her voice has always been out there. al: do you think that is getting across? gov. mcauliffe: i wish it would get across more. but it is early in the process. on the republican side, there has been a lot of static up in the air. it has been an interesting year. she gets results. againstt obama ran hillary and made her his secretary of state. that tells you something. she has said i will continue the policies of president obama. senator sanders has been critical and called him weak and indecisive. which he is neither. she wants to build on it, but once to protect her left flank
so someone does not get in and tear down these things. al: will she win virginia easily? gov. mcauliffe: it is never easy. she will win virginia. i give senator sanders from a discredit. al: how big she wins matters? gov. mcauliffe: of course it does. and it matters where you win in virginia. al: how big of a victory do you anticipate? gov. mcauliffe: i will take one vote. a win is a win. i don't care if it is half about. vote. al: let me ask you to put your expert hat on and look at the republican party. what do you make of the donald trump phenomena? gov. mcauliffe: it has been a circus to watch these debates. you watch senator sanders,
secretary clinton, it is a different debate. with governor martin o'malley it was a substantive debate. it has been embarrassing to watch these debates go on. i never attack our country. i think we are the greatest nation on earth. can we make it better? of course. is all of this that china killing us and japan is taking -- forget that. al: it seems to be working for donald trump. gov. mcauliffe: for a certain segment. he would have a tough time winning the general. al: he would. who would be the toughest to run against hillary? gov. mcauliffe: i think that cruz would have a tough time. i see the attraction with senator marco rubio. al: john kasich? gov. mcauliffe: i know governor kasich. he would be formidable in virginia. sen. rubio:'s joe young, the could because, joe young.
they have to worry about their left and right flanks. al: they would be much stronger in the general in your view then ted cruz or donald trump? gov. mcauliffe: 270 electoral votes. you look at how many the democrats start with and the republicans. we have a huge lead. how do you grow it? you have to go to states like new mexico, colorado, the fatah with large -- nevada with large hispanic populations. they have watched these attacks on the hispanic community, this is such a turnoff. theenerally get made 60% of hispanic vote. with what donald trump has said, it could be an historic high for hillary. with the rhetoric that has gone on, there is a real possibility there could be an
historic turnout. people are angry, closing our borders. the issue with refugees, the idea of no muslims in our country. there are one billion muslims in the world. we go to them today to ask them to help support us fight isis. al: we said we would talk about virginia issues. one of them is political. whether the redistricting controversy will go to the supreme court. with the death of justice scalia, some people say it makes it very likely that what you have done in virginia would be overturned. gov. mcauliffe: we have just gone to the process in virginia and now we have one new democratic seat. the lines were very unfair. all five state lines in virginia are democrat. we have gone through the process and they have read ron -- read ron some lines -- redrawn some
lines. al: can you pick up other democratic seats? gov. mcauliffe: we have created just one. there are other seats that are competitive. northern virginia, there is always an opportunity. a very rich vote area to pick up democratic seats. i think we net one seat. florida has added two. seats in the new democratic column. al: i'm glad you did not walk away from the stable. thank you all for watching -- away from this table. thank you all for watching. ♪
he said it also brought him or kindness from readers than anything he has ever written. i am pleased to have roger angell back. i am supposed to be up. [laughter] charlie: we will talk old in a minute. your health is good? roger: i am good. charlie: your lovely wife died and then you remarry. roger: i remarried. charlie: that's one of the things that you talk about. loneliness. roger: unbearable things happen to us. loss. the weight of loss seems a marable, and you gallant -- seems unbearable, tand then you go on. charlie: here is what you said.
i wrote this whole piece. this is a collection of all the things you have written here. i wrote this whole piece in pieces. i did not know what to do with it. there is a lot in there about loss. i lost my older daughter, i lost my wife of 48 years. in between there, we lost a dog who jumped out of the window during a thunderstorm. there are wounds in and out and they are wound in and out. often interrupted with change in tone. there are jokes, jokes about death. it sounds like me. i love good jokes. tell us about aging beyond what you just said and what i just said. roger: aside from the arrival of sex, it is the second biggest surprise in your life.
suddenly you are old and you do not feel old. you see how old you are. all oldthat almost people feel about the same. it is the great misconception. are bowed and look gray and move slowly, that we have given up. i'll think that is true. life keeps happening. charlie: did this resonate with people your age? roger: enormously. charlie: life keeps happening? roger: i say there is a phenomena that old people notice. if you're at a dinner party among friends, the moment comes and you think of something and you speak. everyone looks at you and nods and the conversation goes on as if you had not said anything. and you think, did and i just say something? -- didn't i just say something?
it is the invisibility of age. it is unconscious. he is old and has had his turn. now it is our turn. way helpedas in some it feel less invisible. charlie: recognized but not expressed. that is what good writers to. do. essay got a this lot of responses, i am trying not to become a spokesman for people my age. that is just what happens to me. it has been surprising. the other thing that is really surprising is, a lot of younger people have been reading the book and saying, now i see. my parents and grandparents. they also think, it's not going to be so bad when i get there. charlie: is that what you are saying? roger: i don't know. sometimes it is horrible.
bad times. losses are unbearable. ?harlie: how do you bear them roger: i say i have been going to the same therapist for years. it is not therapy anymore, just scheduled conversations. after my wife died i said i do not know how i can stand this. she said, neither do i, but you will. that was the perfect thing to say. charlie: neither do i, but you will. rogerr: yeah. charlie: you love baseball more than anything. roger: more than anything? charlie: more than any sport. roger: sure, i guess so. charlie: the hall of fame is pretty good, too. roger: i don't look for deeper meanings in baseball. i never tried to connect it to america. been as ab has always
fiction editor. the thing that connects baseball and writing is that both of them look easy, and they are really hard to do. it's hard for almost everybody. it is hard to write well. much harder to play ball than it looks. that is part of why you keep going. charlie: you see baseball in the major league's, you are looking at the best of the best. roger: it is hard for them too, but there is a difference between the top level and the low level. charlie: it is still hard for them? roger: i'm not so sure it is hard for hank aaron. somebody once said, how does it feel to come to the ballpark and get two hits? he said, i never think that. if i don't get them tonight, i will get them tomorrow night.
the wonderful manager of the said, the hitter to think about is the .240 hitter just barely going along and what he would like is one extra base hit per week. one extra base hit per week will hitter. a .270 charlie: and two would make him .300 hitter? roger: i don't know about per week -- but the struggle is endless. the writing struggle, what i really love is sitting down with the writer i have worked with -- yours, william trevor each have a copy and are dealing with a sense that there is something wrong in the tone,
something is a little off. not the actual writing. you try to think, what will we do about this? john updike would do this over and over again. the last day going to press, later that day he would phone me and read something that he had rewritten. an entire passage and he would say, how does that sound? he would say it to himself because he wanted to say how will the reader take it? it is all about the reader. does this sound better? does this? soun sound better? this is what writers do. charlie: john updike was also competitive. you are excited about a young novelist then he went home -- roger: i would sometimes say -- we talked back-and-forth on the phone a lot and i would say, john, there is a wonderful new story with a new writer and i think you'll like it.
he would say, really? in three weeks later there would be a new story from him. [laughter] charlie: i am hesitant to do or any of them that came forward and spoke to you and made you say, this is the talent of god? any writers? he mightthink that have enjoyed it. but he was like nobody else when he arrived. these amazing casuals and essays about indescribable combinations of things happening. full of artistic and historic references. heartbreaking and funny and completely surprising. over and over. half the people on the magazine did not understand them and were angry that we were publishing them.
because bill sean the editor loved him as well and said i don't know what this is but it is something else. other people thought he was -- they said as long as he is writing for us, we will be ok. charlie: tina brown got you to write about yourself. roger: she did. charlie: did you resist that? was surprised because i had a sense of privacy about running my family and my children. she said, you have had an interesting life. i have heard some of your stories. try to write more. that is why i wrote this book. there is a lot of personal stuff in here and i will always be grateful to her. charlie: was it hard for you? roger: i can't remember. i don't think it was a breakthrough. there were things i wanted to write about. i wanted to write about my stepfather, eb white.
he was not just a great writer but physically one of the most graceful people. just moving. walking down the road toward the pasture, there was something about him. he was very shy. a world-class hypochondriac. i would hear him every week on the comment page for the new yorker, he would lock himself in his study. you would hear -- long pauses and little bits. he would come out for lunch and not say anything. he would mail it off in the 2:00 mail and say, it isn't good enough. you would read it and he would come back next monday and say, not bad. charlie: [laughter] roger: the amazing thing about pros feels like the easiest thing in the world. dashing off a letter or talking to someone.
charlie: but you knew that he agonized over it? roger: yeah. writing for some people is easier than it is for others. charlie: it is hard for you? roger: not as hard as it used to be. it used to be very hard to start a piece. end of season baseball the world series -- all of the stuff. there are days i'd say, i cannot do this. but this is something in my conscience about performance. can i do this sort of thing? after a while i learned that i can do this sort of thing. so the start is not as hard as it used to be. i am surrounded with wonderful writers. new york is the greatest venue for writers. i have always had wonderful writers around me. i see them thinking, what is the matter, why isn't this working?
if you are running on a deadline, that goes away. charlie: your mother was a fiction editor? roger: she was the first fiction editor. charlie: then you begin fiction editor? roger: not right after. charlie: no, but you held the position that your mother held. roger: i ended up in her office. in the back of the closet, when i moved in -- she had not been there for years, and i found around thing of face powder from my mother. i told this to the therapist. said, the greatest single act of sublimation in my experience was living in my mother's office. roger: were you an athlete? charlie: i was a -- charlie: were you an athlete? roger: i was a boy athlete. but not great. i would throw a curveball, but -- charlie: they would hit it. what about golf or tennis?
roger: i played a lot of tennis over the years. i played a lot of doubles with people my age and played with the same people for your. after year. you hit the ball and you knew where the next shot was going. charlie: you kept a diary? roger: never. charlie: why not? you are a man of letters. roger: never had daily thoughts. charlie: is that necessary to keep a diary? roger: i don't know. i never kept a diary. one thing that i did that is unusual. donald put me onto this. he said, if you want to change writing, turn the paper around. turn it this way, instead of this way, and start writing across whatever is on your mind. cross writing. you can start cross writing and say i meant that to be so-and-so, or something funny
happened. or this happened tuesday -- you start going across. it is entirely different. it is not what you write if you write this way. just do that instead of that and feel in my thoughts. written 10 to 12 pages about what is happening. that has happened the last few days. not as a regular thing. charlie: it seems to me that, whoever it was who said i do not know what i think until i see what i wrote, whoever said that. [laughter] if i am writing, i am trying to go somewhere. charlie: you are trying to tell a story that has a beginning. roger: i am try to talk to this invisible reader -- i am trying to talk to this invisible reader. charlie: what brings you joy in life? work? roger: if i've written something
good, i feel really good. if i have written some in today, i am ok. charlie: you are a great man and i'm thrilled that you are as healthy and able as you are. that you can contribute things like this that help connect to all of us. you.: thank charlie: his book is called " this old man: all in pieces." ♪