3 measurements spanning 4 days, net +38. 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 2,333–2,383 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
10 Aug 2026, 17:43
2,377
+18
7 Aug 2026, 18:12
2,359
+20
6 Aug 2026, 23:48
2,339
first reading
Engagement
18 posts held, back to 10 March 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 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
42.4%
avg views ÷ 2,377 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,010
5 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.60%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
5
of 18 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 4 of 5 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 7 August 2026
Posts held
18 (10 March 2026 – 7 August 2026)
Views total
5,037
Reactions total
63
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 16:39 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.
Reaction mix
269 reactions across 17 posts, in 19 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 30.9% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
83
30.9%
❤
53
19.7%
🥰
23
8.55%
😁
21
7.81%
💔
16
5.95%
🙏
16
5.95%
🔥
12
4.46%
🤡
12
4.46%
👎
7
2.60%
😐
5
1.86%
⚡
4
1.49%
🤬
4
1.49%
😢
3
1.12%
🥱
3
1.12%
👏
2
0.743%
🤨
2
0.743%
🌚
1
0.372%
🏆
1
0.372%
😱
1
0.372%
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 17 of the 18 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 269reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 18 most recent posts we hold, published 10 March 2026 to 7 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.
(图为温哥华本地的当前在线Meshtastic 节点,能看到最南的美国 Point Roberts 也有几个节点)
无线电技术是我极为喜爱的一个通讯技术分支,因为它有巨大的技术底座和广泛的应用,例如手机信号、电台广播、短波通联、蓝牙、LoRa和Meshtastic,天然分布式,有大量应用场景只受限于物理法则而非中央机房或法律法规。
我时不时玩的用SDR(软件定义无线电)收电波,把模拟信号数字化,看RDS的电台节目名一个字母一个字母的蹦出来,很有趣。
当年的课堂项目:一个基于汽车钥匙信号截取、重放的中继攻击,也是灵感来自SDR。可以实现对老型号汽车的无接触盗取。新一点的车辆会在信号中加入rolling code滚动码,类似于两步验证中authenticator提供的短时间有效的认证码,我的原始中继攻击就会因认证失效而失败。当然这也有办法处理,可以在车钥匙发送信号时在几十个毫秒内检测到信号并发出大量信号进行干扰(想起了刘慈欣的…
我朋友/群友 胡贝侨 做了一个雅思/思培口语练习应用:
JoeSpeaking.com
可以像真实考试一样与 AI 雅思考官实时自然对话,完成后获得即时反馈。
去年我们第一次在温哥华见面,他提到了这个产品方向,现在居然已经有付费用户了。
这次他给了 20 个 Credit,在设置输入 ALIEN200 即可领取,先到先得,有英语考试需求的朋友赶紧免费用起来。
===
如果有朋友需要对自己的 AI 产品进行推广,可以直接在群里发言,我会酌情在频道做免费推送。频道订阅者2000多人,希望大家都能互相提建议,互相产生共鸣,共同扶持走过冷启动和慢增长。
❤9👍2🤨1🥰1
Showing the 12 most recent of 18 posts we hold for @SteamVents. 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
Citation-graph rank — 462,927 of 1,169,250entries 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.
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 4 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.
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 10 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Alien外星人” (@SteamVents), 2,377 subscribers as measured 10 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/SteamVents.
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.