Channel
@Digital_Monkey_Business
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
266subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001324614299 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @Digital_Monkey_Business |
| Description | Exposing the vitiosity of tech use, demystifying pajeetware, providing insight about developments affecting freedom. |
| Created | 12 June 2018 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 7 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/Digital_Monkey_Business |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Aug 2026, 00:32 | 266 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 07:14 | 266 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 5 June 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 4 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (5 June 2026 – 4 August 2026) |
| Views total | 2,409 |
| Reactions total | — |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 00:32 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 7 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
🍎 Last night, Apple briefly removed Telegram from the App Store because a single user had planted illegal pornographic content in a public group chat. ⬅️ Telegram was restored within hours. But I want to explain what happened — to warn other app developers and help protect online communities from similar attacks. 🧹Because Telegram quickly removes illegal content from public groups using user reports, AI filters, co…
Signed Matthew
Cash for phone machine gets scammed instead of the other way around like what usually happens.
Signed Matthew
AI won't come for blue collar jobs... the trades are the safe haven away from college debt... https://fixupx.com/i/status/2082878382685966650
Signed Matthew
Armstrong Economics America’s Local Police Are Becoming Intelligence Agencies ➖ @slashbiz_syndicate ➖ #SurveillanceState
Signed Matthew
At full buildout, costs would reach at least $500 billion. The development in Ohio would be the largest data center project announced to date.— Article
Signed Matthew
Asking AI for political decisions – what could go wrong?
Signed Giambattista Vico
Smartphone and laptop prices are rising. Here's why they won't stop. | Blaze Media https://www.theblaze.com/tech/smartphone-and-laptop-prices-are-rising-here-s-why-they-won-t-stop
Signed Matthew
Protect your children
Signed Giambattista Vico
Suspecting AI cheating, Ivy League prof ordered in-person final; scores fell 50% Article, Comments
Signed Matthew
Photo, posted without a caption
Signed Matthew
Now AI companies buy books in bulk and throw them away.
Signed Giambattista Vico
Photo, posted without a caption
Signed Matthew
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @Digital_Monkey_Business. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank — 596,149 of 1,183,361entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 7 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Digital Monkey Business” (@Digital_Monkey_Business), 266 subscribers as measured 7 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Digital_Monkey_Business.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.