On a personal level, the best defense against materialism and greed is to give money away. You need to be charitable, engage in philanthropy.

People who haven't benefitted from decades of neo-liberal prosperity are right in their assessment that democracy does work for certain people, but not for them.

To bring your stakeholders and to do that, you must show that this transformation you are proposing makes good business sense.

I think the fundamental thing about art is that it's a place where you can be honest about the human condition without having to be practical about it.

Freedom of expression isn't just about protecting popular speech - it's about creating the conditions where unpopular ideas can challenge power and where dissent can flourish without fear.

Look at something like Uber... on balance- it's still a taxi service! In the end, what they designed was a different way to connect customers and a service provider using technology, leading to a better experience for both.

There's definitely a sense that regulators don't understand how firms operate and the practicalities of what they do- and hence that regulations won't help resolve the issues, such as governance issues, that are there.

When you tell people these things, they get a little fatalistic about it. They tend to think, 'Well, I guess there's not much I can do about that.' I would call that a bias. It is wrong just as often as it's likely to be right. We really need to interrogate and deconstruct that assumption. It's rarely true, and it can lead people to internalise some of these effects in a way that can be pretty damaging and totally unnecessary.

In the short-run, my fear would be that we've mismanaged the relationship with China through miscalculation to produce a 1914-like situation. There's obviously the danger of nuclear weapons and a miscalculation leading to their use, and inevitably therefore, catastrophic outcomes.

We've had wars, poverty, and homelessness long before anyone went into space. It's not accurate to say, 'we're doing space exploration, and that's why we have poverty' – if we stopped space exploration, those problems wouldn't be solved, they haven't been solved in thousands of years.

The difference now is that our actions are not isolated. Developments in communication mean that we now engage in a subtle yet continual process of peer-review which assesses the morality of our conduct as societies and individuals.

This ease of gaining virtue status on social media, coupled with our innate desire for status, explains the platform's toxicity. We're drawn to the simplest form of status acquisition, and social media facilitates this with minimal effort, creating a cycle of virtue signalling that feeds our need for recognition and approval.