👋 Hello Community, We’ve made some important updates based on your feedback. Credit System Now Live We’ve switched to a credit-based system with Offers (previously called Plans). The payment gateway is temporarily disabled and will return in a few days. Until then, simply message us to get started. Minimum top-up: $10 What’s Coming Next We’re currently focused on: - Making the API more stable - …

Channel
HacxGPT
@HacxGPT
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
1,329subscribers
+20 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1002164320319 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @HacxGPT |
| Created | Between 1 June 2024 and 30 September 2024— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 30 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 10 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 30 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/HacxGPT |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 30 Aug 2026, 13:24 | 1,329 | +2 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 16:28 | 1,327 | +2 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 12:33 | 1,325 | -2 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 00:47 | 1,327 | +2 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 14:54 | 1,325 | +6 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 03:14 | 1,319 | +6 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 05:05 | 1,313 | +3 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 09:38 | 1,310 | +1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 22:32 | 1,309 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 18:13 | 1,309 | first reading |
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 13 February 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 · 30 days
- 9.63%
- avg views ÷ 1,329 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 128
- 1 post measured
- Reaction rate
- —
- this channel exposes no reaction counts
- Posts in window
- 1
- of 20 held
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 3 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (13 February 2026 – 3 August 2026) |
| Views total | 128 |
| Reactions total | — |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 22:32 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.
What this channel posts
- Video runtime
- 11m 49s
- Average length
- 5m 55s
Measured directly from 2 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.
Reaction mix
91 reactions across 16 posts, in 9 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 38 | 41.8% | |
| 🔥 | 36 | 39.6% | |
| 👍 | 6 | 6.59% | |
| 👏 | 4 | 4.40% | |
| ☃ | 3 | 3.30% | |
| 🆒 | 1 | 1.10% | |
| 😁 | 1 | 1.10% | |
| 🥰 | 1 | 1.10% | |
| 🫡 | 1 | 1.10% |
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 16 of the 20 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 91reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 13 February 2026 to 3 August 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.
Recent posts
👋 Hello community, For some time, some guys have been trying to hack into us or do something, but it's fine. You guys just keep doing your thing; we don't care about that. All our APIs are tested multiple rounds. Probably, they are using AI to do it. Just keep going, and if you are bored with your failed constant tries, just get fucked off. — HacxGPT Team
❤7😁1
Would you like us to introduce a credit/usage-based system?
- 👍 Yes, add a credit-based option36%
- ⚡ Yes, add a compute-unit system18%
- 🔄 Offer both subscription and usage-based options47%
- 👎 No, keep subscriptions only23%
The shares total 124%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
👋 Hello community, We are seeking your feedback regarding a proposed adjustment to our service model. Numerous users have expressed a desire to utilize our models for specific tasks without the necessity of a subscription. Given our status as a small-scale project with limited resources, subscription plans can occasionally present a financial burden for users requiring only intermittent access. Consequently, we are…
🔥2🆒1
HacxGPT pinned a photo
👋 Hello Community, We didn't come to upgrade. We came to redefine. Introducing HacxGPT Ninja Red — our most powerful model ever built, purpose-engineered for the offensive security lifecycle. ⚔️ 2x better than our previous model across every benchmark that matters — Terminal, Telecom, and SICCODE. In our internal evaluations, Ninja Red outperformed models like Claude Opus 4.5, DeepSeek V3.2, Mistral, and GPT-5.1 C…
🔥8❤1
👋 Hello Community, Introducing HacxGPT Lightning 1.1: the next generation of our Lightning series with enhanced capabilities and improved performance. Details: https://hacxgpt.com/models/lightning-1-1 — HacxGPT Team
❤6🔥2
🚨 Urgent Security Notice The source code for *Claude Code* has reportedly been exposed through a map file published on the npm registry. Our team has successfully decoded and reconstructed all accessible files from the exposed map file. Access Password: @ThreatServer File Link: https://t.me/ThreatServer/3212
❤4
👋 Hello Community, We’re excited to announce the release of our new uncensored dataset, now publicly available. This medium-sized dataset contains a wide range of raw, unfiltered (toxic) conversational content and has been used in training HacxGPT models. It’s designed for research, experimentation, and advanced model development in areas such as alignment, red teaming, and robustness testing. Feel free to explore…
🔥4❤2👏1
👋 Hello Community, Today was a *busy* (and honestly, pretty exciting) day for us at HacxGPT! We spent the day deep in testing, squashing bugs, and pushing the limits of what HacxGPT can do. Along the way, we built some really cool things… and yes, a few “we probably shouldn’t show this” kind of things too 😄 In one of our more intense tests, HacxGPT managed to independently generate a production-ready R.A.T. in abo…
🔥2
👋 Hello Community, We’re excited to be back with some great updates! Our API now fully supports the widely loved Claude Code, and we’ve also developed a fully Anthropic-compatible API. This allows you to seamlessly integrate and use HacxGPT directly with Claude Code. With the HacxGPT API, Claude Code becomes more than just a tool—it evolves into a significantly more powerful and versatile experience, powered by Ha…
❤4👍3🔥1
👋 Hello Community, After a long period of silence, we’re excited to finally return with some updates. Over the past weeks, our team has been hard at work building and refining new technology behind the scenes. Today, we’re introducing hacxgpt-ninja-preview — an experimental preview of our upcoming Ninja series models. This early release is designed to showcase the direction we’re heading: significantly faster perfo…
🔥7❤3
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @HacxGPT. 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.
Polls
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Would you like us to introduce a credit/usage-based system?
- 👍 Yes, add a credit-based option36%
- ⚡ Yes, add a compute-unit system18%
- 🔄 Offer both subscription and usage-based options47%
- 👎 No, keep subscriptions only23%
The shares total 124%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 13 February 2026 to 3 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Forward network
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.
Mentions
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.
Cite this entry
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 30 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“HacxGPT” (@HacxGPT), 1,329 subscribers as measured 30 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/HacxGPT.
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.