如果你很聪明, 那么你为什么没富起来? 只要你赚不到钱,其实说到底,还是不够聪明。
❤5👍4🙏2
Signed 很好哥 @henhao

Channel
@hwdbRJ
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
18,290subscribers
-19,354 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1003704000699 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @hwdbRJ |
| Created | Between 1 February 2026 and 20 May 2026 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 3 October 2026 |
| Measurements held | 35 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 3 October 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/hwdbRJ |
Personal blog — 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 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 83% 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 3 Oct 2026, 21:56 | 18,290 | -974 |
| 25 Sept 2026, 02:01 | 19,264 | -8,197 |
| 18 Sept 2026, 21:19 | 27,461 | -253 |
| 16 Sept 2026, 10:00 | 27,714 | -530 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 14:19 | 28,244 | -294 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 23:21 | 28,538 | -844 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 02:41 | 29,382 | -793 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 03:21 | 30,175 | -778 |
| 5 Sept 2026, 02:14 | 30,953 | -279 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 10:13 | 31,232 | -369 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 04:57 | 31,601 | -286 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 05:26 | 31,887 | -224 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 02:45 | 32,111 | -302 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 23:16 | 32,413 | -341 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 21:53 | 32,754 | -356 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 19:44 | 33,110 | -159 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 21:26 | 33,269 | -107 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 23:24 | 33,376 | -211 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 20:36 | 33,587 | -383 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 07:08 | 33,970 | first reading |
26 posts held, back to 20 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 66 pages of 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 15 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 26 (20 May 2026 – 15 September 2026) |
| Views total | 17,160 |
| Reactions total | 26 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 24 Sept 2026, 04:15 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.
985 reactions across 26 posts, in 9 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 70.1% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 690 | 70.1% | |
| 👍 | 129 | 13.1% | |
| 👏 | 62 | 6.29% | |
| 🔥 | 49 | 4.97% | |
| 🙏 | 17 | 1.73% | |
| 😭 | 16 | 1.62% | |
| 🥰 | 13 | 1.32% | |
| 🎉 | 7 | 0.711% | |
| 🤓 | 2 | 0.203% |
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 26 of the 26 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 985 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 26 most recent posts we hold, published 20 May 2026 to 15 September 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.
如果你很聪明, 那么你为什么没富起来? 只要你赚不到钱,其实说到底,还是不够聪明。
❤5👍4🙏2
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
Photo, posted without a caption
❤7👍6🙏2
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
一命二运三风水,应该倒过来读。 先不断换自己的舒适区,再看运气,最后认宿命。
❤8👏3🙏2😭1
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
这世界上,哪有那么多水到渠成。 只是被各种事和人磨平棱角和翅膀而已。 你想飞,所有人会拉着你。 你想飞,所有经历会给你沉重打击。 你想飞,所有羁绊让你无处遁形, 稳住脚步👣
❤10👍3🔥1😭1
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
没有一个帝王,会因为爱听音乐爱看电影爱美人成为了帝王。 但一定是因为这个时代这个天时,需要地利的精神领袖而造就了 他,例如李世民。剩下就是人和了。妙哉
❤12👍5🔥2😭1
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
天地之大,你到底在追寻着什么呢
❤14👍4👏2😭2
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
这种人一定能够走到社会的顶层: 1,不断突破舒适圈 2,果断拒绝所有不喜欢的人和事 3,只交四种人:能力强 正能量 有教养 执行力强 4,只做四种事:赚钱 学习 复制 创新 5,极度的自律。对自己够狠,对别人够好!
❤18😭5👍4👏1
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
孤独本是常态,逢人何必多言。
❤15👍4🥰3🎉2
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
不要责怪过去的自己,因为他当时也很迷茫。
❤15😭6👍3🔥2
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
人生不过短短三万天,请尽量快乐。有人爱你当然好,没有也没关系! 有德国蓝标WS联系我
❤14🙏2🎉1👏1
Signed 很好哥 @henhao
月亮永远是跟着地球走, 地球永远是跟着太阳走。 人也是一样,你如果没跟对团队,成为独立的自己。 这个人大概率这辈子就定型了,成为井底之蛙,稳定的可怕。 真正的顶级大佬,他已经不会跟着人转了,他会跟着自己的愿景走。 终其一生,链接能够给他带来能量的人和事。 生命的真相是熵增,我们无法阻止,但可以延缓。 想事想源头,万事知因果。做事抓核心,百行少蹉跎!
❤21👏5👍3
Signed 海外担保·公群负责人 很好哥 @hwhw
每个人都想通过捷径,去实现自己的目的。 但是我们所处的时代,已经把我们的天赋变得一文不值。 尤其是很多实体已是夕阳,你能实现抱负的事其实很少了。 我们都是从一开始的自命不凡天资卓越,到现实所遇,社会毒打。 再到最后,否定和质疑自己的选择是否对错。 很好哥觉得这中间最大的问题,是因为我们在做事的时候: 受到一些挫折,又没有达到我们预期的结果。 所以当我们看到一个,能够拥有你想要的结果的人。 我们会认为对方可能更聪明。 我想说的是:我们能生在这个年代,祖上都不容易。 人和人真的没有什么差距,时间换空间,勤能补拙,悟吧骚年!
❤24👍7🔥2🤓2
Signed 海外担保·公群负责人 很好哥 @hwhw
Showing the 12 most recent of 26 posts we hold for @hwdbRJ. 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.
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 3 October 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“🌊《很好哥冲浪日记》” (@hwdbRJ), 18,290 subscribers as measured 3 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/hwdbRJ.
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.