https://youtu.be/TYt5yuiGk9E?si=_L6p0zJzhuJcYgDh
❤1🔥1

Channel
@fusion_to_future
On this record: Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
211subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002289225309 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @fusion_to_future |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 14 September 2024— 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 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 7 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/fusion_to_future |
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Aug 2026, 14:11 | 211 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 07:16 | 211 | first reading |
18 posts held, back to 14 September 2024 — 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.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 18 posts for this entry, the most recent from 3 May 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
72 reactions across 17 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 55.6% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 40 | 55.6% | |
| 👍 | 16 | 22.2% | |
| 🔥 | 9 | 12.5% | |
| 🤯 | 3 | 4.17% | |
| 👏 | 1 | 1.39% | |
| 💩 | 1 | 1.39% | |
| 😁 | 1 | 1.39% | |
| 🥰 | 1 | 1.39% |
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 72reactions 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 14 September 2024 to 3 May 2025, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
https://youtu.be/TYt5yuiGk9E?si=_L6p0zJzhuJcYgDh
❤1🔥1
https://youtu.be/shMMW_RhztA?si=o8U7QtnmFC7RZfRe
❤1
Photo, posted without a caption
🤯2❤1
Photo, posted without a caption
❤2
هدف اصلی ما در زیرک اینه که عموم مردم رو با فناوریهای جدید هوش مصنوعی بیشتر آشنا کنیم. چرا که قطعاً اتفاقات 2 سال اخیر در هوش مصنوعی ما رو وارد نقطه عطفی از تاریخ کرده. جایی که خیلی از مفاهیمی که بدیهی پنداشته میشده و ملکهی ذهن ماست، و در روزمره به هیچ عنوان دلیلی در بازنگری کردن در اونها نمیبینیم، دستخوش تغییرات فراوان شده. جایی که خیلی از چهارچوبهای اساسی که جامعه بشری با اونها کنترل میشه، امکان تغییر شگرف …
❤3👍3
ما در زیرک علاوه بر تلاش برای ایجاد دسترسی عمومی و با کیفیت به فناوریهای هوش مصنوعی، آزمایشهای فراوانی رو برای درک بهتر حدود و ثغور این مدلهای هوش مصنوعی و ساخت رابطهای کاربری بهتر انجام میدیم تا بتونیم به قدر خودمون در جهتدهی این فناوری به سمتی که بیشترین رشد رو برای همه ایجاد کنه نقش داشته باشیم. تصویر بالا مربوط به بهبودهایی هست که در رابط کاربری برای استفاده از O1 mini انجام دادیم. و آزمایشاتی رو برای سنجش…
👍2🔥2❤1
لینک لوکیشن محل برگزاری رویداد پارک فناوری پردیس، آمفی تئاتر ساختمان فن بازار رویداد LevelUP https://g.co/kgs/iHwUv84
👍6👏1🔥1
https://olympics.tech/content/?id=20
کاهش هزینه مدلهای OpenAI با قابلیت Prompt Caching شاید متوجه شده باشید که وقتی توی یک مکالمه کلی پیام رد و بدل کردید، هزینه تولید پیام جدید بیشتر میشه. علتش اینه که مدل برای ایجاد هر پاسخ جدید، همه پیامهای قبلی رو یک دور از اول مرور میکنه تا اگر سوالتون به پیامهای قبلی اشارهای کرده باشه، بتونه بهدرستی اون رو تشخیص بده و پاسخ بده. برای همین تعداد توکنهای مصرفی و هزینه ایجاد پیام جدید به تدریج بیشتر میشه. اینجا…
❤5👍2🤯1
## آیا رباتهای تسلا فقط عروسکهای خیمهشببازیاند؟ مراسم رونمایی We Robot تسلا با خودنمایی نسخه جدید ربات انساننمای آپتیموس همراه بود. این رباتها که در میان جمعیت میچرخیدند، نوشیدنی سرو میکردند و حتی در ایستگاه مترو قدم میزدند، با توانایی صحبت کردنشان همه را متعجب کردند. اما حالا به نظر میرسد این نمایش چشمگیر، بیشتر به یک نمایش سرگرمکننده شباهت داشته تا رونمایی از یک …
❤3
متن انتشار یافته در نشریه UnHerd در باب موضع جوایز نوبل امسال . شاید فکر کنید که جایزه نوبل فیزیک به یک فیزیکدان تعلق میگیرد. اما امسال اینطور نبود. طبق روال، این جایزه در اوایل هفته گذشته به طور مشترک اهدا شد، اما هر دو برنده، دانشمند کامپیوتر بودند. انگار که مدال طلای دوی ۱۰۰ متر المپیک به یک دوچرخهسوار رسیده باشد! باید گفت که دو برنده جایزه، جفری هینتون و جان هاپفیلد، در رشته خود بسیار برجسته هستند. با این حال…
❤3
متن زیر که در مورد جوایز نوبل امسال است شاید بی ربط به متن بالا نباشه پ.ن: متن زیر بازنویسی پست انتشار یافته در نشریه UnHerd است . https://unherd.com/newsroom/has-the-nobel-prize-cancelled-physics-and-chemistry/ 👇
❤1🥰1
Showing the 12 most recent of 18 posts we hold for @fusion_to_future. 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 — 848,500 of 1,176,251entries 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.
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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
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.
“Fusions by Saeed Abhari” (@fusion_to_future), 211 subscribers as measured 7 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/fusion_to_future.
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.