Channel
@losslessann
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
848subscribers
-32 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001211660222 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @losslessann |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 July 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 3 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 7 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 3 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/losslessann |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 3 Sept 2026, 01:07 | 848 | -5 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 14:06 | 853 | -12 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 00:11 | 865 | -6 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 23:47 | 871 | -8 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 21:51 | 879 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 00:02 | 880 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 23:59 | 880 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 16 January 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 page 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 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 17 June 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
80 reactions across 19 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 43.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 35 | 43.8% | |
| 👍 | 23 | 28.7% | |
| 👏 | 19 | 23.8% | |
| 👀 | 3 | 3.75% |
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 20 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 80 reactions 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 16 January 2026 to 17 June 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.
Decentralized Security Decision Making Most security systems still rely on a small team or centralized authority to decide what happens during an exploit. When suspicious activity is flagged through Lossless, it doesn’t go to a closed-door committee. Instead, token holders participate directly through on-chain verification. They review the evidence, vote on whether a transaction is fraudulent, and help determine t…
❤5👍1
🚨What DeFi Users Actually Demand in 2026 They’re done with “secure” marketing. After watching $600M+ vanish in weeks, smart capital is flowing to projects that offer more than audits and insurance promises. They want instant transaction freezes, on-chain exploit verification, and fast fund recovery when prevention inevitably fails. That’s why real-time defense iis the new baseline for trust. Prevention still mat…
❤5
🚨 The 5-Minute Exploit Problem Most DeFi drains in 2026 don’t drag on for days.They’re over in under 10 minutes. By the time teams spot the attack, post “we’re investigating,” or even trigger a pause. The funds are already bridged out and gone. → Audits? They passed. → Insurance? Too slow to matter. → Bounties? Useless after the money’s moved. This is exactly why real-time protection beats every traditional defen…
❤3
45% of AI-generated code fails basic security tests. And now people are vibe-coding smart contracts. A new Cloud Security Alliance report found: - 86% of AI-generated samples fail XSS defense - 88% vulnerable to log injection - AI-assisted devs produce security findings at 10x the rate of manual devs - 20% of AI-generated code references packages that don't exist, opening the door to supply chain attacks The securi…
👏6❤1
Vibe coding = great for ideas. Terrible for security. AI is making Web3 development faster than ever, but you can't prompt-engineer your way out of a smart contract exploit. Security requires active mitigation. By integrating the LERC-20 standard, you bake decentralized fail-safes directly into your token contract. If a breach happens, malicious transactions are frozen and reversed. Stop relying on perfect code. S…
April just became one of the worst months for Web3 security in history, with over $570M drained in massive exploits like KelpDAO and Drift Protocol. 🚨 The harsh reality? The "Audit and Pray" era is dead. Sophisticated threat actors are bypassing smart contracts to target infrastructure and human vulnerabilities. Even with 10+ audits, perfect code won't save you when the exploit inevitably happens. Zero-days are …
👀3
🚨 April 2026: DeFi’s Brutal Reality Check In under a month, hackers have drained over $600M from protocols like Kelp DAO ($292M bridge exploit) and Drift ($285M). These weren’t black swan events. They followed the same script we’ve seen too often: known single points of failure, ignored governance warnings, and response times too slow to matter. The uncomfortable truth? Prevention alone isn’t enough anymore. Audit…
👍2
$292M drained from Kelp DAO's rsETH bridge on April 18. 18% of circulating supply, gone to a single forged cross-chain message. The vulnerability was publicly documented 15 months before the attack. A breakdown of how we got here. 🧵 https://x.com/losslessdefi/status/2046982967675769337?s=20
👍2
Claude’s new Mythos model just changed the security game. Its ability to instantly identify zero-day vulnerabilities is incredible, but it exposes a sobering reality: even the most robust, heavily funded corporate infrastructures are riddled with flaws just waiting to be exploited. If AI can uncover these massive attack vectors in seconds, the old Web3 standard of "audit and pray" is officially dead. No code is flaw…
👍3
“Code is Law” doesn’t cut it when institutions are watching. The attack surface (perps, RWAs, tokenized assets) only gets bigger. The protocols winning serious TradFi capital treat security as infrastructure, not a patch: • Real-time exploit detection • Instant malicious transaction freezing • Built-in fund recovery before damage spreads Building secure first infrastructure is not easy, so start here 👇 https://los…
❤3
The S&P 500 now has an officially licensed perpetual contract on Hyperliquid. Not a synthetic. Not an unofficial mirror. A licensed product backed by institutional-grade S&P index data, trading 24/7 on a decentralized L1. This is the clearest signal yet: Tradfi trading capital is now on-chain markets. But here's what doesn't get talked about enough: Every new avenue of capital flow is a new surface to defend. Perp…
👏5
Claude Code's security features are a great first step. But a first step is exactly what they are. Enterprise-grade web3 security isn't a checkbox — it's a stack. And we're glad the floor is rising. We build on top of foundations like this. When base-level tooling improves, our ability to give protocols deeper, smarter protection improves with it. Better defaults for everyone → better surface for us to work with →…
👏4❤2
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @losslessann. 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.
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 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list 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 3 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Lossless Announcements” (@losslessann), 848 subscribers as measured 3 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/losslessann.
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.