Channel
@bluebird_channel
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
7,930subscribers
+88 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 |
| Created | 23 November 2018 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (TGDataset) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 30 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 14 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 30 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/bluebird_channel |
Technology — 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 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 97% 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 30 Sept 2026, 18:00 | 7,930 | +15 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 23:16 | 7,915 | +4 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 14:22 | 7,911 | +8 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 19:37 | 7,903 | -3 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 10:58 | 7,906 | +2 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 21:14 | 7,904 | +17 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 23:34 | 7,887 | +4 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 15:46 | 7,883 | +17 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 13:44 | 7,866 | +5 |
| 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 |
25 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 19 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 25 posts for this entry, the most recent from 27 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
671 reactions across 25 posts, in 19 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 30.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 😭 | 201 | 30.0% | |
| 😢 | 151 | 22.5% | |
| ❤ | 107 | 15.9% | |
| 🥰 | 40 | 5.96% | |
| 🌚 | 33 | 4.92% | |
| 👀 | 31 | 4.62% | |
| 🤔 | 30 | 4.47% | |
| 😁 | 25 | 3.73% | |
| 👍 | 16 | 2.38% | |
| 🤡 | 9 | 1.34% | |
| 👎 | 7 | 1.04% | |
| ❤🔥 | 5 | 0.745% | |
| 😇 | 4 | 0.596% | |
| ✍ | 3 | 0.447% | |
| 🔥 | 2 | 0.298% | |
| 🙏 | 2 | 0.298% | |
| 🤝 | 2 | 0.298% | |
| 🥴 | 2 | 0.298% | |
| 🤬 | 1 | 0.149% |
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 25 of the 25 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 671 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 25 most recent posts we hold, published 6 May 2026 to 27 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.
现在恋爱与xp上都体现一个极端化。 以至于说不仅是只喜欢纯爱的罕见，喜欢个萝莉/脚都算正常了。 毕竟不仅是色情产品的结局普遍像是彻底玩坏/雌堕/变成苗床这种不现实的极端情况。 现在流行的色情幻想也差不多极端，例如想象自己已经回不去了，或者反过来想象自己是迫害方的,把对方变成变不回来的娃娃之类的。 幻想中追求刺激很正常，但极端更是和重辣一样掩盖了原本的味道。 所以往往是没尝过比较压抑时更喜欢，毕竟它本质是重复且不可持续的。 就和NTR XP一样，一旦NTR成功了就不算NTR了。只能换一个人重复获取之前的刺激过程。 而老吃家通常对这种重复的味道已然厌倦，更喜欢细细品味原有的味道，更加追求过程的创新，而不再追求极端。 就像资深av观众都已经对最终正戏无感一样。
🥰11❤1
最近codex更新了贡献指南，明确表示不再接受外部贡献者的代码，不过已然没人关心。 至于它使用的理由，其实也有道理。 正确的代码需要对项目的全局认知blabla。审核这些代码消耗了员工的精力blabla。 所以把政策改为不接受代码，外部贡献应该以issue或者设计讨论做出。 当然很明显可以看出，这种问题早就有了。 之所以修改政策，其实是因为ai时代下都是用agent写的，实现一个功能已经非常容易了。 如何“做对”才是困难的，因此实现代码本身并没有太大意义，需求与问题本身才重要。 某种意义来说也就是 “代码是廉价的，请展示你的讨论” 的意思吧。
👎7😁5🤔1
随着最近ai网络安全能力的提升，什么都不懂纯靠ai挖掘漏洞的可行性和实施者大幅提升了 不过这倒让我N年前的愿望终于实现了 具体来说是早年的网络安全水平很差了，以至于是个人拿个扫描器都能玩黑客cosplay 后面才进来的自然难免怀念一下这种红利期（虽然实际上从赚钱角度并不算） 不过也算是某种必然，毕竟多了解可以发现其实漏洞依然非常多。 只是它变成了智力问题，没法靠简单机械识别，需要智力资源参与。 以至于有水漏洞这种说法，也就是刻意找价值不高没人去做的漏洞。 在行内看起来就属于水了，因为都知道能找到，但大家不愿意浪费有限的时间在这上面。 而现在ai提供了智力资源，就把原本大家都知道能找到但不愿意投入的漏洞拉回了明面。 显然这部分潜力会被不断释放，而这个过程中漏洞就跟扫描器时代一样不断印刷出来。 而在这个过程中作为被代替的对象，应该有两种感受吧 一方面是在红利期，作为印刷机的操作者可以把原本知道但没有精力实施的事情实施，很爽…
🥰9✍3❤1
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…
🤔22❤1
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
😢29❤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
😢28❤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
😢33🥰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❤2
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
Showing the 12 most recent of 25 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.
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 25 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. 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 30 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“青鸟的频道” (@bluebird_channel), 7,930 subscribers as measured 30 September 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.