For many of these people the social is just a mirror of themselves. I'm not against the social, but I want something genuinely social, not something that has been fetishized as social so that a group of people can feel better about themselves.

Free services like Wikipedia I don't think benefit anyone - they don't benefit the professional because they're not paid.

Being human in the digital world is about building a digital world for humans.

Zuckerberg wants to take us back to the dorm room where we all know each other. I don't want to, I want to go to the city.

There's a lot of ideology about free, that we can have free services, free content, it's one of the reasons why the music industry which I defend has been decimated.

We don't have a choice about Facebook any more. The choice element is less obvious than it seems. Maybe the 1bn poor people and a few hundred thousand rich people can afford not to be on it.. the rest of us don't have any choice.

The key relationships in the future will not be between people, but between machines and people.

We don't live in the old world. But I don't want everyone to know what I've done. We all know every kind of example we could throw out there. The world we see online is very spiteful, we all know about people who have had bad stories thrown at them. If we were more generous I might be more happy about the reputation economy.

Millions and millions of exuberant monkeys are creating an endless digital forest of mediocrity.

We have to move away from the entirely ad-supported business because the needs of it means that it has to keep driving into privacy, and that's not good for anyone because we all need to have something about us that is secret from some people.

The history of the Web so far says that we are highly motivated to come up with ways to make sense of a world richer and more interesting than the constrained resources of the traditional media let on.