Read the full transcript here.

What mistakes do investors make when trying to predict which startups will succeed? Which matters more: a startup's team or its central idea? How do startup founders differ from other capitalists? What makes something a "pattern-breaking" idea or behavior? Are startup founders less sensitive to negative feedback than the average person? Is it possible to achieve startup success without challenging the status quo? Is it true that 90% of startups fail? What is founder-future match? At their core, what are movements? Can startup founders be too good at storytelling? Has the US become less innovative? What are Singapore and Israel doing right that enables them to have the highest number of "unicorn" startups per million people? What's the right amount of "shaking things up"?

Mike Maples, Jr. is an entrepreneur, venture capitalist, podcaster, and the co-founder of FLOODGATE, a leading seed stage fund in Silicon Valley that invested in companies like Twitter, Twitch, Okta, and Outreach at the very beginning of their startup journeys. An eight-time member of the Forbes Midas List of Top Venture Capital investors, he was one of the pioneers of the seed investing movement, which started in the mid-2000s, and now is a mainstream part of startup funding. Follow him on Twitter at @m2jr.

Further reading:

• Pattern Breakers: Why Some Start-Ups Change the Future, by Mike Maples

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• WeAmplify — Transcriptionists

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift

Read the full transcript here.

What sorts of decisions are we making without even realizing we're making them? Are people aware of their own values? Do they know how those values rank relative to each other? What are all the various parties, interests, and values that have to be addressed and balanced when making decisions in a healthcare context? What does it mean to "play-test" yourself? What are the best strategies for giving feedback? How much energy is required to make various kinds of decisions? How can we practice and get better at decision-making? What is "tabletop exercising"? What are the most effective ways to bring other people into the decision-making process? What are some aspects of games that ought to be put to good use in non-game contexts? Why are educational games usually neither fun nor educational? How can game design features be used in ways that avoid turning metrics into targets? How can we make better decisions about how to divvy up our time?

Dr. Dan Epstein is a practicing medical doctor and academic PhD focusing on decision-making and game design. Dan is the director of The Long Game Project, which helps businesses and leaders improve strategy and decision-making with games and tabletop exercises. Dan is also an ambassador for Giving What We Can, a community of people who pledge to donate a portion of their income to effective causes; and he's a member of High Impact Athletes, a community of current and past athletes who do the same. Follow him on Twitter at @drdanepstein, email him at email@longgameproject.org, connect with him on LinkedIn, or learn more about his work at longgameproject.org.

Further reading:

• The Long Game Project newsletter
• The Long Game Project YouTube channel
• Foundations of Tabletop Exercising: Design Exercises for Real Impact — a free course taught by Dan

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• WeAmplify — Transcriptionists

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift

Read the full transcript here.

Why do there seem to be more dystopias than utopias in our collective imagination? Why is it easier to find agreement on what we don't want than on what we do want? Do we simply not know what we want? What are "solved worlds", "plastic worlds", and "vulnerable worlds"? Given today's technologies, why aren't we working less than we potentially could? Can humanity reach a utopia without superintelligent AI? What will humans do with their time, and/or how will they find purpose in life, if AIs take over all labor? What are "quiet" values? With respect to AI, how important is it to us that our conversation partners be conscious? Which factors will likely make the biggest differences in terms of moving the world towards utopia or dystopia? What are some of the most promising strategies for improving global coordination? How likely are we to end life on earth? How likely is it that we're living in a simulation?

Nick Bostrom is a Swedish-born philosopher with a background in theoretical physics, computational neuroscience, logic, and artificial intelligence, along with philosophy. He's been a Professor at Oxford University, where he served as the founding Director of the Future of Humanity Institute from 2005 until its closure in April 2024. He is currently the founder and Director of Research of the Macrostrategy Research Initiative. Bostrom is the author of over 200 publications, including Anthropic Bias (2002), Global Catastrophic Risks (2008), Human Enhancement (2009), and Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (2014). His work has pioneered many of the ideas that frame current thinking about humanity's future (such as the concept of an existential risk, the simulation argument, the vulnerable world hypothesis, the unilateralist's curse, etc.), while some of his recent work concerns the moral status of digital minds. His most recent book, Deep Utopia: Life and Meaning in a Solved World, was published in March of 2024. Learn more about him at his website, nickbostrom.com.

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• WeAmplify — Transcriptionists

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift

Read the full transcript here.

How much energy is needed for GDP growth? Would our civilization have developed at the same rate without fossil fuels? Could we potentially do the same things we're currently doing but with significantly less energy? How different would the world look if we'd developed nuclear energy much earlier? Why can't anything go faster than light? Will the heat death of the universe really be "the end" for everything? How can difficult concepts be communicated in simple ways that nevertheless avoid being misleading or confusing? Is energy conservation an unbreakable law? How likely is it that advanced alien civilizations exist? What are S-risks? Can global civilizations be virtuous? What is panspermia? How can we make better backups of our knowledge and culture?

Anders Sandberg is a researcher at the Institute for Futures Studies in Sweden. He was formerly senior research fellow at the Future of Humanity Institute at University of Oxford. His research deals with emerging technologies, the ethics of human enhancement, global and existential risks, and very long-range futures. Follow him on Twitter / X at @anderssandberg, find him via his various links here.

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• WeAmplify — Transcriptionists

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift

Read the full transcript here.

How hard is it to construct a toaster from scratch? Do we in modern times individually have more knowledge than individuals living 100 or 1,000 years ago? Should corporations be thought of as a kind of emergent artificial intelligence? To what extent are corporations — and more broadly, whole economies — aligned with human values? Which animals experience the smallest amount of existential dread? Are humans at the top of the evolutionary "pyramid"? Is it possible to make a completely harmless car? Or is it even possible to make a completely harmless anything? What are the differences between "Cowboy Earth" and "Spaceship Earth"?

Thomas Thwaites is an award-winning design researcher and author of two acclaimed books, The Toaster Project, and Goatman. His sometimes eccentric projects explore the psychological and social impacts of technology as we struggle to find a sustainable future. His work is exhibited at museums and galleries worldwide, and is in the permanent collections of the Victoria & Albert Museum in London, The Boijmans Museum in Rotterdam, and the Banque de France. He has a BSc. in Human Sciences from University College London and an MA in Design Interactions from the Royal College of Art. Learn more about him at his website, thomasthwaites.com.

Further reading:

• The Toaster Project: Or a Heroic Attempt to Build a Simple Electric Appliance from Scratch, by Thomas Thwaites
• Goatman: How I Took a Holiday from Being Human (One Man's Journey to Leave Humanity Behind and Become Like a Goat), by Thomas Thwaites

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• WeAmplify — Transcriptionists

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift

Read the full transcript here.

What is "apocaloptimism"? Is there a middle ground between apocalypticism and optimism? What are the various camps in the AI safety and ethics debates? What's the difference between "working on AI safety" and "building safe AIs"? Can our social and technological coordination problems be solved only by AI? What is "qualintative" research? What are some social science concepts that can aid in the development of safe and ethical AI? What should we do with things that don't fall neatly into our categories? How might we benefit by shifting our focus from individual intelligence to collective intelligence? What is cognitive diversity? What are "AI Now", "AI Next", and "AI in the Wild"?

Adam Russell is the Director of the AI Division at the University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute (ISI). Prior to ISI, Adam was the Chief Scientist at the University of Maryland's Applied Research Laboratory for Intelligence and Security, or ARLIS, and was an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland's Department of Psychology. He was the Principal Investigator for standing up the INFER (Integrated Forecasting and Estimates of Risk) forecasting platform. Adam's almost 20-year career in applied research and national security has included serving as a Program Manager at the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA), then as a Program Manager at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) (where he was known as the DARPAnthropologist) and in May 2022 was appointed as the Acting Deputy Director to help stand up the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H). Adam has a BA in cultural anthropology from Duke University and a D.Phil. in social anthropology from Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes Scholar. He has also represented the United States in rugby at the international level, having played for the US national men's rugby team (the Eagles).

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• WeAmplify — Transcriptionists

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift

Read the full transcript here.

How much should we trust social science papers in top journals? How do we know a paper is trustworthy? Do large datasets mitigate p-hacking? Why doesn't psychology as a field seem to be working towards a grand unified theory? Why aren't more psychological theories written in math? Or are other scientific fields mathematicized to a fault? How do we make psychology cumulative? How can we create environments, especially in academia, that incentivize constructive criticism? Why isn't peer review pulling its weight in terms of catching errors and constructively criticizing papers? What kinds of problems simply can't be caught by peer review? Why is peer review saved for the very end of the publication process? What is "importance hacking"? On what bits of psychological knowledge is there consensus among researchers? When and why do adversarial collaborations fail? Is admission of error a skill that can be taught and learned? How can students be taught that p-hacking is problematic without causing them to over-correct into a failure to explore their problem space thoroughly and efficiently?

Daniel Lakens is an experimental psychologist working at the Human-Technology Interaction group at Eindhoven University of Technology. In addition to his empirical work in cognitive and social psychology, he works actively on improving research methods and statistical inferences, and has published on the importance of replication research, sequential analyses and equivalence testing, and frequentist statistics. Follow him on Twitter / X at @Lakens.

Further reading:

• Nullius in Verba (Daniel's podcast)

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• WeAmplify — Transcriptionists

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift

Read the full transcript here.

What are "WEIRD" cultures? What percentage of the world's population is WEIRD? Why do WEIRD cultures tend to use analytic thinking (as opposed to the wholistic thinking used in non-WEIRD cultures)? Does school make you more intelligent or merely more knowledgeable? Do individualistic cultures tend to innovate more than collectivistic cultures? How does moral reasoning differ between WEIRD and non-WEIRD cultures? Is the world becoming more WEIRD? How diverse are non-WEIRD cultures?

Joseph Henrich is currently the Ruth Moore Professor of Biological Anthropology in the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University. Before moving to Harvard, he was a professor of both Economics and Psychology at the University of British Columbia for nearly a decade, where he held the Canada Research Chair in Culture, Cognition, and Coevolution. His research deploys evolutionary theory to understand how human psychology gives rise to cultural evolution and how this has shaped our species' genetic evolution. Using insights generated from this approach, Professor Henrich has explored a variety of topics, including economic decision-making, social norms, fairness, religion, marriage, prestige, cooperation, and innovation. He's conducted long-term anthropological fieldwork in Peru, Chile, and in the South Pacific, as well as having spearheaded several large comparative projects. In 2016, he published The Secret of Our Success (Princeton) and in 2020, The WEIRDest People in the World: How the West became psychologically peculiar and particularly prosperous (FSG). Learn more about his work here, or follow him on Twitter / X at @JoHenrich.

Staff

• Spencer Greenberg — Host / Director
• Josh Castle — Producer
• Ryan Kessler — Audio Engineer
• Uri Bram — Factotum
• Jennifer Vanderhoof — Transcriptionist

Music

• Broke for Free
• Josh Woodward
• Lee Rosevere
• Quiet Music for Tiny Robots
• wowamusic
• zapsplat.com

Affiliates

• Clearer Thinking
• GuidedTrack
• Mind Ease
• Positly
• UpLift