Cloudflare Wallet 的前端也太敷衍了吧!改一下 URL 参数你就可以假装自己抢到了超级隐藏款 ID,就像这样: https://cloudflare.pay/claimed?tag=1 相当讽刺的是这个前端甚至是有对参数的校验的,中文和标点都过不去。

Channel
agou的胡言乱语
@bakadog
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
855subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1001590712600 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @bakadog |
| Created | Between 1 August 2021 and 28 February 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 7 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/bakadog |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Aug 2026, 09:33 | 855 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 09:27 | 855 | first reading |
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 17 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 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
- ERR · 30 days
- 36.3%
- avg views ÷ 855 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 310
- 19 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- 0.659%
- reactions ÷ views · ER floor
- Posts in window
- 20
- 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. It is computed over the 7 of 19 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 5 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (17 July 2026 – 5 August 2026) |
| Views total | 5,896 |
| Reactions total | 19 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 09:33 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
- ≈1,870
- Videos
- ≈126
- Links
- ≈435
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.
Reaction mix
19 reactions across 7 posts, in 3 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 73.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 14 | 73.7% | |
| 👏 | 3 | 15.8% | |
| 🤩 | 2 | 10.5% |
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 7 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 19reactions 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 17 July 2026 to 5 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.
Telegram Stars
- Stars received
- 2
- across the posts below
- Posts paid on
- 2
- of 19 we hold a reading for · 11%
- Most on one post
- 1
- single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @bakadog. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 17 July 2026 to 5 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Recent posts
1000 万以内最好玩的游戏,没有之一,啊哈哈哈
https://zhuzhiliao.imsai.cc/ 有这么好玩的游戏为什么不早点告诉我
不如“豆包手机”?Siri AI 一周体验 上周我将我的 iPhone 17 更新到了 iOS 27 Developer Beta 4。好巧不巧,从那时起之前的 Siri AI“电子围栏”似乎放宽了,我也很幸运地没有通过修改定位等复杂的方式就顺利用上了 Siri AI。头两天我的部分联网任务无法运行,不知道是不是因为我修改了分流,从周四开始整个 Siri AI 就完全正常了。 使用了一个多星期的 Siri AI,这款迟到的“苹果 AI”体验到底怎么样?我的评价是,这是一款基本符合预期的产品,但离真正能派上用场还有很长的一段距离。 在 agou's blog 阅读全文
预告一下即将发布的新文章 😂
对 DeepSeek API 模型 ID 的思考 在 DeepSeek V3/R1 时代,API 中的模型 ID 是 deepseek-chat 和 deepseek-reasoner。随后从 V3/R1 更新版,V3.1 发布,V3.1 更新版,再到 V3.2 发布,这两个模型 ID 也没有任何变化。而别家模型虽然也会提供始终指向最新版模型的 gemini-flash-latest 别名,但一般情况下都会同时提供 gemini-3-flash 这样固定版本的模型名称。 随着 4 月份 DeepSeek V4 Flash 和 V4 Pro 发布,不知道是不是由于 DeepSeek V4 Flash 是思考模型,API 模型 ID 的封印终于松动了,改为 deepseek-v4-flash 和 deepseek-v4-pro,被官方宣布即将退役的 deepseek-chat 和 deepseek-reasoner 两个 ID,…
👍4👏2🤩1
库克在 2026 财年第三季度电话会议上回答摩根大通分析师萨米克 · 查特吉 (Samik Chatterjee) 提问时明确表示,即将在国内推出的 Apple 智能并非包含 Siri AI 在内的最新版。 谈到中国市场,上周我们已经获得批准,可以推出 Apple 智能最初推出的一批功能 (sort of the original features of Apple Intelligence),比如“消除”等。 我们目前正在推进这些功能的上线。至于 Siri AI,未来还需要开展更多工作,目前我们才刚刚起步。 这也同时宣告国内用户用上 Siri AI 的幻想正式破灭:国行 Apple 用户在外版用户吃上 Siri AI 时,只能上手全新的旧版“跑马灯”了。同时,“sort of the original features“的表达和”消除“的举例也耐人寻味,不知道这个”首批“功能较外版 Apple 智能是否会有删减或差异。
👍2
回复:对频道内容的反馈 帖子发出后,收到了不少读者和路过的朋友回复,非常感谢大家愿意分享自己的想法。 对于这两年加入的朋友们解释一下,本频道最开始真的只是我的“胡言乱语”,全都是“黑历史”,毫无逻辑性和价值可言。从 2024 年开始,我做出了一些改变,慢慢的让这个频道发布经过思考的,更长的内容。 看到不少朋友说愿意阅读我的这些文字,我非常的感动;但同时也有朋友向我抱怨说这些内容太长,导致可能确实是好内容,但无法给他带来足够的阅读欲望和读下去的勇气。 这同样也是我在考虑的问题。有时候写着写着,想说的话越来越多,内容也越写越长,甚至大把内容写到一半就放弃了。我也有想过在发布完整的内容之余,做一些短的切片出来,但不知道对于看过完整文章的订阅者来说,这是不是一种骚扰?或者是否要把这些内容拆得更碎一些,分开发送? 由于诸多现实因素,这一年是我生命中迄今最困难的时光之一。这段时间以来我也总想对这个频道做更多改变,可在各种原因的影响…
🤩1
Photo, posted without a caption
👍2
Exactly. 我怎么就写不出这么精辟的话,整得啰啰嗦嗦的,哎还得练。 再一次的,这几乎表达出了我内心想说的每一句话。稍微补充一点原文中没有涉及的: 我开始根本不理解在花(大家都知道了,也没必要隐瞒了)把这件事情闹成这样的动机。明明是一件很简单的事情,你愿意道歉道歉,不愿意道歉你就沉默等这个事情过去。你发一个莫名其妙的声明尝试把自己包装成受害者,这有什么好处呢? 直到现在又被爆出来当面一套背后一套,而且一切的起源,就是你抄袭洗稿这件事,到事件发生的第二天还要继续进行,而且越来越赤裸,越锤越有。 这样看来,他们哪里是不会道歉,完全是不想道歉。现在他们的所作所为仿佛是摘下面具的祐天寺若麦一样,我不演了,我就是这个德行我摊牌了。 我现在反而觉得在花频道有点贾国龙“网络黑社会”的味道了。你说我的频道不对,你就是网络黑嘴,就是网络黑社会,我私下里要搞你,至于我有没有洗稿,我们和行业做的是一样的事情,你可以自己来我的投稿群参观。…
👍4
本频道读者通过私下管道向我们投稿了一段发生在某洗稿频道的群组对话,为保护当事人隐私,所有用户名均已打码。 截图中参与讨论的一方为洗稿频道的管理者,另一方并非受害频道的管理者。 该媒体在先前的声明中把自己的行为定性为「互联网内容广泛传播」,同时把公开指责定性为「未沟通、未核实」的非理性行为,并预设了「先私信联系」才算正当的维权路径。这套表述方式把自己重新 Framing 成了一个受害者。 同时,在投稿群内,涉事频道管理员却寻求一个中间人出面施压或斡旋,拒绝反思自己的稿件管理流程问题。当对方拒绝配合、让管理员自己去处理,管理员的反应是「不想改变」「和我无关」,摆出了一副完全拒绝处理问题的嘴脸。 这体现出来了一种极致的双标。声明里说欢迎沟通、理性核实,但在私下场合,却展现出了截然不同的丑陋姿态:试图调动私人关系转移压力,被识破后直接封禁对方。 这是一种极端自利的叙事,假装一副开放沟通的样子,实际上沟通的结果必须对自己有利,沟…
👍1
征集对频道内容的反馈 近期,我注意到我的频道订阅人数接连下跌,阅读量和互动数也降至冰点;与此同时,我的管理员单干后,其频道订阅人数已超过我的两倍,每天群内的讨论总是热火朝天。这让我在屡屡嘲讽我的管理员面前根本抬不起头,只得忍辱负重。🤕 为了搞清楚我的频道究竟出了什么问题,现在本频道正式向广大网友征集改进意见。无论您觉得频道营养太少,更新太慢,抑或太长不想看,都可以踊跃在评论区发言,您的反馈将助力我改进频道内容。 为了鼓励大家分享看法,我将从评论区中抽取提供有效建议的网友(我的管理员除外 😡)随机送出惊喜福利。有的网友说,福利是什么呢,这个的话我自己也没想好,反正不会有人评论的。😭
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @bakadog. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 586,330 of 1,345,403entries 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
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
Named by 2 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 7 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“agou的胡言乱语” (@bakadog), 855 subscribers as measured 7 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/bakadog.
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.