https://youtu.be/5s8NiG97Q-I
👍11❤2

Channel
@HS_academy
On this record: Topic · Observations · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Posts recorded as deleted · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
36,206subscribers
+474 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 31,623–100,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001221021505 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @HS_academy |
| Created | 30 January 2020 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 65 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/HS_academy |
Crypto & trading — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 50% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 1 other registered channel. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @HS_academy/10772 · this entry4 Aug 2026, 22:28 UTC | @chavoonnam/373804 Aug 2026, 22:37 UTC | 1.00 | 10 minutes |
| @HS_academy/11112 · this entry9 Nov 2026, 22:59 UTC | @chavoonnam/388399 Nov 2026, 23:03 UTC | 1.00 | 4 minutes |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @chavoonnam | 5 (5/5 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 5 minutes | this entry (5–0) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 197 comparable posts for this entry, running 1 August 2026 to 9 November 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 12 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Nov 2026, 08:06 | 36,206 | -14 |
| 10 Nov 2026, 08:39 | 36,220 | +70 |
| 8 Nov 2026, 20:57 | 36,150 | +5 |
| 7 Nov 2026, 15:50 | 36,145 | +10 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 18:51 | 36,135 | +12 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 21:07 | 36,123 | -6 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 22:11 | 36,129 | -6 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 18:29 | 36,135 | +9 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 17:29 | 36,126 | +29 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 15:25 | 36,097 | +35 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 14:31 | 36,062 | -7 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 17:51 | 36,069 | -8 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 21:26 | 36,077 | +12 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 18:39 | 36,065 | +12 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 20:19 | 36,053 | +5 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 20:37 | 36,048 | -9 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 18:36 | 36,057 | -9 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 21:55 | 36,066 | -7 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 23:05 | 36,073 | -6 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 20:45 | 36,079 | first reading |
291 posts held, back to 31 July 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 184 pages of 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 11 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 291 (31 July 2026 – 11 November 2026) |
| Views total | 770,700 |
| Reactions total | 3,316 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Nov 2026, 05:48 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.
Measured directly from 6 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
15,403 reactions across 289 posts, in 18 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 44.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 6,811 | 44.2% | |
| 👍 | 5,181 | 33.6% | |
| 😱 | 878 | 5.70% | |
| 👏 | 322 | 2.09% | |
| 🤩 | 311 | 2.02% | |
| 🤣 | 305 | 1.98% | |
| 🎉 | 262 | 1.70% | |
| 🙏 | 254 | 1.65% | |
| 😢 | 233 | 1.51% | |
| 🤯 | 220 | 1.43% | |
| 🤔 | 211 | 1.37% | |
| 😁 | 203 | 1.32% | |
| 🔥 | 156 | 1.01% | |
| ⚡ | 24 | 0.156% | |
| 🕊 | 12 | 0.078% | |
| 🥰 | 12 | 0.078% | |
| 👌 | 4 | 0.026% | |
| 😍 | 4 | 0.026% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 290 of the 291 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 15,536 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 291 most recent posts we hold, published 31 July 2026 to 11 November 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 29 of 73 posts held from the last 30 days (39.7%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
https://youtu.be/5s8NiG97Q-I
👍11❤2
Photo, posted without a caption
😱3
헐... 안돼!! 엔비디아 이사회가 젠슨 황 CEO의 해임을 준비 중이다. 다만, ‘해임 확정’이 아니라 WSJ가 익명 취재원을 인용해 보도한 ‘이사회가 황 CEO의 거취를 논의할 수 있다’는 내용입니다. WSJ는 이사회가 빠르면 보도 당일 회의를 열 수 있다고 썼지만, 공개된 엔비디아 이사회 입장은 조사 착수와 함께 “황 CEO와 경영진을 신뢰한다”는 것이었습니다. 11월 12일 현재 엔비디아 공식 경영진 페이지에도 황 CEO가 창업자·사장·CEO로 기재돼 있습니다. 사유는 두 건의 혼외 관계이며, 그중 한 명은 중국 스파이 혐의를 받고 있다. 이사회는 CEO 거취 결정을 위한 긴급 회의를 소집했다. 내부 조사를 통해 해당 사실이 확인되었으며, 이르면 오늘 회의가 진행될 예정이다. SNS 반응 1. “회사를 세운 사람을 쉽게 내보…
😱36❤14🤯3🕊2⚡1🤩1
월러형~ 왜… 그래 ㅠㅠ
😱65😢18🤯5❤3⚡1🎉1
도널드 트럼프 미국 대통령은 11월 9일(현지시간) 젠슨 황 엔비디아 CEO와 통화했다고 밝혔습니다. 트럼프 대통령은 간첩 의혹을 받는 중국인 사업가에 대해 황 CEO가 “간첩인 줄 몰랐다”고 말했다며, 그의 설명을 믿는다고 전했습니다.
👍46🤣20❤13🤔6
핵심은 머스크가 래리 페이지의 미래 컴퓨팅 전망에 “동의”했다는 것 https://t.me/HS_academy
❤28
AI, 이대로 끝나는 걸까? 해결되는 수순일까? https://t.me/HS_academy 1. 9월 이후, HS팀이 걱정했던 것은 "유가 상승발 물가 상승 및 금리 상승 우려" 등 매크로 변수였습니다. 실제로 이러한 불안감은 현실화되었으며, 시차를 두고 시장에 부정적인 영향을 주었죠. 2. 그런데 11월이 되어 상황을 점검해보니, 오히려 매크로 변수는 진정되고 있습니다. 지난 주 유가는 급락하면서 당분간 걱정을 안 해도 될 정도 수준까지 안정되었고, 금리도 다시 5% 아래로 내려왔죠. 뿐만 아니라, 이번 주에 발표되는 CPI 역시 전달에 비해서 안정화될 것으로 기대됩니다. (작년 11월에 CPI가 발표되지 않아서 yoy는 발표 안된다고;) 3. 반면 AI를 둘러싼 우려는 커지고 있습니다. 중간선거 이후 여러 지역에서 데이터센터 건설을 …
❤59👍17🔥2🤯2
인식(perception)과 현실(reality)은 다르다 83세의 론 바론과 일론 머스크가 대담을 나눴습니다. 론 바론은 일론 머스크의 초창기부터 지금까지 그의 편에서 꾸준히 응원해온 투자자입니다. 인터뷰 마지막에 론 바론은 일론 머스크에게 이렇게 묻습니다. “당신이 내 나이, 83세가 되었을 때 사람들이 당신을 어떻게 기억해주길 바라나요?” 한참을 생각하던 일론 머스크는 이렇게 답합니다. “인식(perception)과 현실(reality)은 다르지요.” 아… 이 말을 들었을 때 머리를 한 대 맞은 것 같았습니다. 저는 살아오면서 “나는 어떤 사람으로 기억되고 싶은가?”를 중요한 동기부여로 삼아왔습니다. 그래서 일론이 “인식과 현실은 다르다”는 말로 대답을 시작한 이유는, 어쩌면 “다른 사람들이 나를 어떻게 생각하는지는 중요하…
❤92🙏17👍12🤔5🤣5🎉4
주말 아침 1시간 동안 달리는 동안 이 영상 정주행했는데 진짜 너무넘흐 좋네요! 더빙되니까 주말동안 한 번 꼭 보세요 ^^ https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=AhZW9f-S_CwxdFAv&v=IjWbvz95w08&feature=youtu.be
❤25
HS팀은 AI투자를 이어가기 위해 이렇게 할 계획입니다 이 영상을 Lilys.ai 에서 요약한 내용을 공유해드릴게요! 유튜브 영상 공유와 관련해서도 "중요한 변화"가 느껴집니다.. 이전에는 HS비서실장한테 요약을 하라고 시켰는데, 최근에는 HS비서실장한테 Lilys.ai 아이디를 주고, 이걸 써라~ 라고 합니다. 어제 실적을 발표한 클라우드플레어가 실적 발표를 했는데, Agent들이 웹사이트를 무지성으로 돌아다니면서 생기는 비효율을 잡겠다는 정말 신박한 비지니스 모델을 내놓았습니다. 간단히 생각해보면, 이런 거죠. 많은 사람들이 유튜브 채널의 영상을 Agent한테, 요약을 시킵니다. 근데, 제가 Lilys.ai 를 쓰다 보면, 말도 안되게 빠르게 결과물이 나올 때가 있더라구요. 이유는 아마도 Lilys.ai 에 다른 누군가가 요약을 하…
❤18👍4
Microsoft Ends Oracle AI Cloud Deal as Part of Broader Partnership Review - Bloomberg 1. 마이크로소프트는 구형 칩을 사용하고 비용 및 지연 문제가 있는 오라클과의 AI 클라우드 계약을 종료합니다. 2. 이 결정은 AI 시대의 컴퓨팅 자원 부족과 클라우드 경쟁 심화 속에서 마이크로소프트의 전략적 재조정을 반영합니다. 3. 마이크로소프트는 약 800억 달러 이상을 다른 클라우드 업체에 투자하며 AI 역량을 강화하고 있습니다. https://readray.ai/s/12047245 ※ 7월에는 투자자들, 10월 이후부터 사업자들의 레버리지가 꺼지고 있습니다...! ※ 쪼금 더 고통스러운 구간이 있겠지만, 옳은 방향으로 가고 있다고 생각합니다!
👍18❤9🤔5🤩1
오늘의 일런머스크(2026.11.07) https://t.me/HS_academy SpaceX 분기 매출 vs NASA 연간 예산 머스크는 2026년 4분기 SpaceX 매출이 NASA의 연간 예산을 크게 넘어설 것이라고 전망 다만 4분기 실적은 아직 확정되지 않았으며, 현재 확인되는 3분기 매출은 약 146억 달러(vs. NASA 1년 예산 $24.4b) SpaceX의 성장 속도는 볼 때마다 놀라운 수준인 듯! 덧, 일런머스크가 4번째 팔콘 발사에서 성공하고 NASA 도와줘서 살았다고 하는 영상은 꼭 한 번 보세요 https://youtube.com/shorts/hvb-fhpw8UM?si=I4uBuvC8OV6YzcLd
🤩13❤4
Showing the 12 most recent of 291 posts we hold for @HS_academy. 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.
@HS_academy edited 3 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
We recorded 6 posts on @HS_academy as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
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.
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
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.
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 8 September 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 12 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“HS아카데미 대표 이효석” (@HS_academy), 36,206 subscribers as measured 12 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/HS_academy.
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.