Hi. I use shortwave (AI email built on top of Gmail) but I’m growing frustrated with it. I’ve never really gotten into telegram as an assistant. Would you mind sharing why telegram is the preferred interaction medium of choice here?
On Telegram It's just very fast to create a bot and getting started.
I've tried WhatsApp before but too complicated and Signal was also complex.
I'd say that Telegram was the easiest to get a poc working.
Did you consider Zulip? I've always wondered why Zulip isn't used more often by communities. Seems like it could be a great hybrid between Discord and Telegram.
Shane Parrish of Farnam Street has his own two volumes of this (the Mental Models series), which although designed beautifully, cost more, have 10x the words, and take 10x the time to get the points across.
> For every tonne of carbon Allbirds emits as a business—from the sheep on its farms to the lightbulbs at HQ—it pays to take a tonne of carbon out of the atmosphere. It costs around 10 cents to offset 10 kg of carbon through its own Carbon Fund.
So they are holding themselves accountable for their footprint, taxing themselves "by funding verified emissions reduction projects across air, wind and energy."
it is exciting and inspirational for a future in which participation wouldn't simply be voluntary — thinking back to that great tweet thread about what it's like to have trash in Japan.
That is such a perfect example of ingroup bias in action.
You can label these materials as censorable because you, likely not a follower of islam, believe that material from islamic uploaders talking about a revolution and indoctrination do not belong on your platform.
yet here we are, with thousands of christian, america-first indoctrination videos, calling for an uprising against everything from vaccines to elections. IT IS THE SAME THING.
you do realize this is a "are we the baddies?" situation, no?
So here we are, being told by YouTube that sources calling the leader of the world's most vile and brutal organization an "austere religious scholar" and deliberately misinforming public about what they can and cannot read are called "credible and authoritative sources".
When your supposedly single reliable source of truth (the media) is so obviously and shamelessly biased, how can you not question the source of "truth" and those who suppress other viewpoints?
I'm reminded of a seemingly prescient quote from 1999's Alpha Centauri:
"As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century, free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny.
The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse has begun its rapid slide into despotism.
Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
Commissioner Pravin Lal, "U.N. Declaration of Rights"
You should have picked better examples like the censorship of the photos of inside the detention centre used to keep the now-orphaned kids that the US split from their parents at the Mexico border and now can’t find the parents.
Or the US involvement in civilian deaths in Yemen.
Your examples both got proper smack downs. My examples are still censored - you or i have never seen pictures of the conditions the kids are stored in (and if you think you have, double check its authenticity). Would be reporters for the Yemen are suppressed well before there’s any risk of them deciding to just skip mainstream media and post online instead. End result is an information vacuum and we can’t have an informed discussion because neither you nor i knows what’s actually happening.
Tell your friend in design they aren't allowed to create any original content. They have to do everything using stock or readily available material. Build a proto. If the proto has any legs or fun, you've got something. You don't need to quit your job to know this yet.
