Channel
@bluebird_channel
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
7,861subscribers
+19 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001163920983 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @bluebird_channel |
| Description | 青鸟的日常和吐槽和段子和群友故事 |
| Created | 23 November 2018 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (TGDataset) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 16 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 16 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/bluebird_channel |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 16 Aug 2026, 19:54 | 7,861 | +10 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 03:17 | 7,851 | +5 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 01:25 | 7,846 | +4 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 14:30 | 7,842 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 14:27 | 7,842 | first reading |
22 posts held, back to 6 May 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 12 pagesof 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 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 22 (6 May 2026 – 11 August 2026) |
| Views total | 25,600 |
| Reactions total | 160 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 18 Aug 2026, 05:49 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 18 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
622 reactions across 22 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 32.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 😭 | 201 | 32.3% | |
| 😢 | 146 | 23.5% | |
| ❤ | 103 | 16.6% | |
| 🌚 | 33 | 5.31% | |
| 👀 | 31 | 4.98% | |
| 🤔 | 25 | 4.02% | |
| 😁 | 20 | 3.22% | |
| 🥰 | 20 | 3.22% | |
| 👍 | 16 | 2.57% | |
| 🤡 | 9 | 1.45% | |
| ❤🔥 | 5 | 0.804% | |
| 😇 | 4 | 0.643% | |
| 🔥 | 2 | 0.322% | |
| 🙏 | 2 | 0.322% | |
| 🤝 | 2 | 0.322% | |
| 🥴 | 2 | 0.322% | |
| 🤬 | 1 | 0.161% |
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 22 of the 22 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 622reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 22 most recent posts we hold, published 6 May 2026 to 11 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.
有时候经常能看到关于llm代码质量的讨论。 不过现在基本已经集中到有没有人类代码的品味/质量这种地方，正确性已经不是问题。 虽然品味这件事情确实能看出来不同，并且从现在正确评价的路线来看短期没什么改善希望 不过对llm说品味本来就很奇怪，因为它与人类并不是同一个“物种”，就和要求长生种理解短命种眼中的时间一样。 最明显的一点，大部分llm都喜欢失败了先加个长超时看看，并且对缓慢的执行时间熟视无睹。 毕竟ai是无时间的，它的时间流动取决于下一个请求，裁剪掉了所有无效等待时间。 并且大部分工具都允许它跳过等待,假如人拥有这种能力，也会丧失对时间的敏感性，与其他人类的“品味“不一样 再者它还是朝生暮死的，不具有人类的社会性与延续性。 这就丢弃了人类代码质量改进中重要的一环，重写。 我们人类可以通过重写/得到奖励 但是对llm角度来说，它重写并没有奖励，反倒是偏离了任务。 并没有一种和人类一样，允许放弃当前任务，回到过去重写之前…
🤔18
作为内容消费者，感觉实际上作为刚入门或者浅度爱好者时是最好的时候。 那个时候到处都是低垂的果实，各种 <你不可不看的X个经典XX推荐>, 几乎不需要花什么精力. 并且经典入门级资源通常免费, 或者打骨折价。 但是一旦沉迷了,消费内容速度过快，就进入到需要花费精力去筛选，并且价格不算美丽的阶段。 就像各种翻推荐书单,和关注游戏打折信息一样 而更严重的发烧友的挑剔程度与时间，稍有名气的游戏都被排除了。 只能自己去发掘小众宝藏，更甚者只能去支持新出未完成的内容，或者自己做 其中消耗的精力与成本，如果不是在当博主自然非常非常不划算的，或者说只是实在没办法才这么做 综合来看，就发现实际上刚入门反而是最爽的，越资深越麻烦
😢26❤4
感觉虽然今年已经是AI好几年了，但是现在反而才是更符合传统科幻系AI想象的第一年 毕竟传统科幻里对AI的关键词印象一般是 擅长写代码/黑客/数学/计算，不擅长写作/情感交流 但是实际上现实刚开始是反过来的 今年出现的ai新闻 各种入侵系统/独自完成编程任务才符合传统科幻观。 即使开始不一样，最终还是回归到了想象中AI容易的地方。 也许也有人选择方向的原因，毕竟就像这些年都有坚持招lean工程师给AI做数学训练的。
👀14👍4😇4
朋友前段时间被“包养”了，但最近发生了一些意外。 当然，这并非传统意义上的包养，只是承诺赞助。但现在老板忙起来中断了。 首先，当然也没有资格指责老板。 至于后续影响，除了最常见的因为赞助产生了预期开支，导致又得被迫缩减开支，影响生活习惯。 还纠结着要不要去找工作：万一下个月赞助继续，到时候又得辞职。 仿佛持有这种“稳定”收入就像恶堕本一样 有预期稳定收入就敢各种订阅了，深入了生活选择与习惯。 即使之前从来没有想过，但是已经把自己当作可以赞助的对象。 不愿离开，想象老板还能回心转意 哦哦哦 没有那个我会不行的。给我那个吧 不管什么我都会做的 当然为了找一份工作，不断下调自己求职标准不也很常见么
👍10
把玩偶/抱枕的棉花抽出来去洗时,掏碎棉花时有种奇怪的感觉, 剥皮掏空内核只剩皮物的oo感. 突然感觉就和君子远庖厨一样, 屠杀玩偶还是太不二次元了
😢27❤3
尽管已经经历了很多次，每次遇到群友新阶段换地图，还是有一种奇怪的NPC感觉 具体来说就像是群友上班/转行/毕业/决定改变自己，然后就不再玩某个游戏/不再用某个聊天软件了。 当然这并不直接表达关系的变化，不会说一下子拉黑了。 但是常见情况是交流只有被放弃的这部分，于是好像没什么可说了，也没什么交集了，甚至都看不到对方了。 就像小说里主角升级换地图后，原本地图的npc一样。 虽然还活着，但是在主角视角里已经不再出现了。 成为了主角的过去，在未来里已经没戏份了
😢32🥰5
虽然近些年都说pc游戏画质上升已经到瓶颈了，但是实际来看反倒更看画面了。 毕竟现在游戏本来就卷，现在还有ai，已经是每个品类都人满为患，玩家注意力不足。 在卷到千篇一律只有微创新的现在，很多游戏被购买的理由已经变成了美术风格，其他地方拉不开差距。 只是从以前的卷高画质变成卷美术风格。
🥰12❤1
有个经典段子说清华人聊天，不出三句话，一定会主动告诉你他是清华毕业的。 这个段子的翻版也非常多，把属性换成身高180、学历之类的都有。 显然，主要是调侃过度展示自己，这也符合现在大众对于社交的某种期待——互相保持神秘感，慢慢发现对方的美。 但是现实来看，被调侃的行为反而更受欢迎。虽然很俗套，但是很有效。 例如男娘视频评论区里的小男娘就很受欢迎。 毕竟就连现在二游角色都得有强度或者特色才有人愿意了解角色的故事。 对于三次元可能一开始就不知道和对方聊什么，毕竟对方没什么tag。 即使偶然聊一下，但是往往发生的事情是双方都擅长等待别人发掘，后面也不知道继续聊什么了。 反倒是被调侃的行为才有效，展示自己的属性吸引同好，尽快表露自己的优点与爱好为彼此创造条件，节省时间。
❤14
没想到今年我居然能对bw有参与感, 打开steam弹一个bilibili world游戏展会来了 别人线下bw看cosplay,看展会玩, 我在steam看, 就很.. 你懂吧 而且b站为了体现自己真的是展示,还贴心的不打折. 告诉玩家你们看看就好,别买
😭30😁3🥴2❤1🥰1
在某次想学点啥，下意思想从最底层开始时突然意识到一个问题. 好像这种直觉好像太普及了, 导致不管是啥, 它的分布都是杠铃一样,首尾两端是顶峰,中间就很少. 懂底层的很多, 懂应用的也很多,但是做中间的就很稀少. 不过想想也很合理, 即使人再多, 普通人最可能认识到的也就底层原理和实际应用. 而且这两个本身就符合大家的偏好, 要么直接有直接可用成果, 要么能感觉自己学到了很多很厉害 造轮子的快感 同时也符合直觉, 多打基础/直接能用总是没有错的, 不用思考太多 至于中间层,可能本身就不适合当兴趣爱好. 中间层自己就很难了解, 要深入理解行业真正情况. 同时正反馈也很差,反馈周期还长. 如果不是本身因为专业/研究方向,已经明确以后要干这行,大概也没什么人选. 好处大概是没太大竞争, 虽然一旦方向整体不景气就完蛋了.
🤔7❤1
现在不管在哪里都有着被时间追赶的感觉。 例如不管打开什么软件几乎都有各种限时特价，限时活动加上一个跳动的倒计时催促着。 当然这些其实是很常见心理学的手段， 利用限时等让这件事情优先级变高。 因为人们害怕错过，从而实现催单等作用，就像书非借不能读一样。 但是一旦普及了，环境上就有点变味了。 一切都是限时的，常驻低人一等，得时刻追逐保持日活周活才能不错过限时。 频繁的各种活动，原价就吃亏了，得抓住。 ai的5h/一周限时额度用不完就亏了，到期之前一定要找东西花完。 令人精疲力竭，但又不愿意错失。
😭36❤1
在现在你不干不是有的人干的时代，已经很难证明自己对别人的必要性了。 对于公司招聘这种付钱所以选择面广的自然不用说，最典型的你不干有的是人干，收的简历都看不过来。 即使到了选择面最小的个人社交上，现在也是这样。 主要是以前最常见的需求无非就是答疑解惑/情绪价值，但是显而易见除非真是什么顶尖大神，现在比起AI是没什么绝对优势的，毕竟它随叫随到回答还快。 至于剩下的虚拟社交很多时候完全是谁都行，铁打的群流水的群友。 现在还幸存的就是身体陪伴了，毕竟现在ai再能聊也没有现实涩涩感，也不能陪人去吃疯狂星期四。 说到疯狂星期四，明天就是星期四了，所以有没有...
👀15😢14❤🔥5❤2🔥2
Showing the 12 most recent of 22 posts we hold for @bluebird_channel. 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 — 1,037,358 of 1,548,671entries 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.
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.
Named by 3 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.
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 4 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists 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 16 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“青鸟的频道” (@bluebird_channel), 7,861 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/bluebird_channel.
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.