National news — 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 82% 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Growth
33 measurements spanning 43 days, net +371. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 40,882–41,365 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 33
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
18 Sept 2026, 17:18
41,309
+20
16 Sept 2026, 09:00
41,289
+30
14 Sept 2026, 14:18
41,259
-13
13 Sept 2026, 04:15
41,272
+18
11 Sept 2026, 08:17
41,254
+32
8 Sept 2026, 09:59
41,222
+28
5 Sept 2026, 03:19
41,194
+11
3 Sept 2026, 09:04
41,183
+8
2 Sept 2026, 05:44
41,175
+21
1 Sept 2026, 07:07
41,154
+7
31 Aug 2026, 06:56
41,147
+2
30 Aug 2026, 07:25
41,145
+38
29 Aug 2026, 04:46
41,107
+32
28 Aug 2026, 02:34
41,075
+12
27 Aug 2026, 02:07
41,063
+6
26 Aug 2026, 01:48
41,057
+7
25 Aug 2026, 03:04
41,050
+24
23 Aug 2026, 17:09
41,026
-8
22 Aug 2026, 01:49
41,034
+18
20 Aug 2026, 21:45
41,016
first reading
Engagement
71 posts held, back to 3 August 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 100 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
6.11%
avg views ÷ 41,309 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,520
37 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.925%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
37
of 71 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. It is computed over the 36 of 37 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 28 September 2026
Posts held
71 (3 August 2026 – 28 September 2026)
Views total
93,415
Reactions total
839
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
29 Sept 2026, 05:03 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
Photos
≈9,550
Videos
≈15
Links
≈2,430
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 29 September 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.
Video runtime
5m 15s
Average length
5m 15s
Measured directly from 1 video 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
1,600 reactions across 64 posts, in 37 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 16.9% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🤡
271
16.9%
❤
199
12.4%
💩
177
11.1%
🤬
141
8.81%
😁
117
7.31%
🖕
102
6.38%
🤣
101
6.31%
🤮
92
5.75%
👍
58
3.62%
👎
49
3.06%
👏
30
1.88%
😭
25
1.56%
🙏
23
1.44%
🕊
20
1.25%
🍾
18
1.13%
🥱
17
1.06%
😱
16
1.00%
💅
14
0.875%
🤩
14
0.875%
🤯
14
0.875%
17 further kinds
102
6.38%
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 68 of the 71 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 1,600 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 71 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 28 September 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.
中国AI编程工具智谱被指秘密上传项目数据
开发者：这就是偷东西
据港媒报道，近日中国企业智谱 AI 开发的 AI 编程工具被指在用户未明确授权的情况秘密上传项目数据到外部服务器，引发争议。智谱 AI 承认此事并致歉，表示已修复该“漏洞”。
据发现此事的开发者称，秘密上传的数据包括商业项目的快照和 Git 提交历史等，而且上传机制为默认开启，且没有提供任何可关闭该功能的按钮。有开发者直指这就是“偷东西”。据称已有一家中国头部机器人公司已因此禁用了智谱 AI 的工具。
有媒体形容，这种行为几乎相当于“把研发过程、产品路线和内部资产一起交了出去”。
近日美国的OpenAI 也被指控从数学家跟AI的对话中获取其研究进度，用于引导 AI 破解一个著名的数学难题，一度引发争议，但智谱AI 是主动从用户电脑获取数据而非经用户输入，引发了更多批评。
#科技 #AI #隐私 #监控 #看鉴
🔗原文链接
《南华早报》Chinese AI…
🤣12❤2😁2
Showing the 12 most recent of 71 posts we hold for @OutsightChina. 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.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
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
Named by 7 registered channels — 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.
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.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
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 29 August 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.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
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.
中国数字时代 @cdtchinesefeed · 44,158 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 29 August 2026
FREE 中文 @freechinese · 27,572 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 55 here — alongside 54 others — read 10 September 2026
Time经济观察 @TimeHorizonX · 20,933 Telegram ranks this channel #21 of 54 here — alongside 53 others — read 25 September 2026
美国之音 @voachinese · 34,696 Telegram ranks this channel #31 of 63 here — alongside 62 others — read 3 September 2026
敏感经济信息分享 @pelosi3 · 71,125 Telegram ranks this channel #34 of 51 here — alongside 50 others — read 20 August 2026
【华尔街见闻】- 财经时讯 | AI 实时互动 @FinanceNewsDaily · 57,803 Telegram ranks this channel #46 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 24 August 2026
This channel appears in 6 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 18 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“看鉴中国 OutsightChina” (@OutsightChina), 41,309 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/OutsightChina.
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.
