Many great startup ideas fall into the 'sounds like a bad idea, is a good idea' category. In fact, most of them do. These are the most dangerous ideas—the ones that sound plausibly good but aren't. There was nobody desperate for a social network for sports fans, so it failed.

The most successful organisations I've met over the years have a very-strong senses of culture (even from start-up stage). This isn't the soft process of drafting a mission statement for your website, but genuinely understanding the type of personality you want your company to have.

We characterise our ideal 'Substacker' in affectionate terms – we call them outsider nerds – they're outsiders insofar as they don't fit comfortably in the dominant media structure for whatever reason – perhaps they feel they can do better work outside of it They're nerds insofar as they're especially knowledgeable or passionate about a particular subject area.

You have to make decisions throughout your life and be prepared to accept responsibility for those decisions. There is also confidence that comes from learning a set of skills – and that confidence allows you to challenge the status quo.

Markets are human artefacts; however we often treat them as natural phenomenon in the same way we might treat a language. Markets are emergent phenomenon too, but individual market-places have proprietors and groups of users and therefore markets are more amenable to change. When something isn't working, we can change the rules!

We do not operate like cameras, capturing a 1:1 replica of the external world. Our sensory faculties are not conduits of raw data; they are gateways to a world laden with meaning.

I often joke that social media is the 'NutraSweet' version—it seems good but doesn't deliver the psychological benefit we expect. In fact, our use of technology can be a big opportunity cost on a lot of the stuff that truly matters for happiness.

It's a very precarious situation we're in right now; and the biproduct of our current policies is that a tidal wave of radioactive social problems is coming. I worry that we'll just repeat the mistakes of the past where drug addictions, drug related deaths, alcoholism and suicide spike out of control.

If you want to understand the mainsprings of human-action, then understanding the remembering self is more important than the experiencing self.

No one chooses their level of creativity. Understanding the neurological underpinnings of our reactions to art doesn't detract from the beauty and awe these creations inspire.

The idea of selfish philanthropy is a push against the notion of philanthropy as simply 'giving back.' That phrase implies that wealth was accumulated by taking something from society. But if you've built a successful business, you've contributed to society—you don't owe anything back.

The act of humans making choices will become a mere memory. We'll be spectators in a novel arena. But is this the zenith of liberty or just a cage?