Channel
@mid_curve
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
786subscribers
-1 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001984482671 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @mid_curve |
| Created | Between 1 April 2023 and 30 September 2023— 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/mid_curve |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Aug 2026, 11:00 | 786 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 02:17 | 787 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 8 July 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 pageof 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. It is computed over the 1 of 11 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 5 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (8 July 2026 – 5 August 2026) |
| Views total | 1,878 |
| Reactions total | 1 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 02:17 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.
1 reaction across 1 post, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 1 | 100.0% |
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 1 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 1reactions 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 8 July 2026 to 5 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.
레이어제로에서 기관쪽 리드 맡고 있는 Cameron이 글을 하나 올렸는데, 공감 되는 내용이 많네요. 1. 토큰화의 핵심 가치는 자산을 블록체인에 올리는 것 자체보다, 고객이 원하는 체인과 앱에서 자산에 접근할 수 있게 하는 멀티체인 유통에 있다. 2. 온체인 유통 전략은 상품 유형(Application), 체인별 표준 통합(Standards), 자산 생애주기 관리(Governance)의 세 요소로 구성된다. 3. 여러 블록체인은 토큰 표준과 개발 언어가 달라, 체인별 맞춤 구축 방식은 비용·인력·운영 리스크를 크게 높인다. 4. LayerZero는 OFT, OFT Adapter, Multi-Asset OFT(Nexus)를 통해 단일 자산 또는 다수 자산을 여러 체인에 통합 발행·이동·관리할 수 있도록 지원한다. 5. 결론적으로 La…
❤1
Signed hj(jun)
비트고가 WBTC 크로스체인 인프라를 레이어제로 버리고 체인링크 CCIP 선택하면서 레이어제로 비판이 많네요 다만 레이어제로를 버리고 CCIP를 선택한 자산들의 월 브릿지 볼륨은 전체 브릿지 볼륨의 3% 미만이라고 합니다. 신뢰도에 문제를 주는 문제는 맞지만, 아직 레이어제로 브릿지 거래량에 큰 타격은 없습니다.
Signed hj(jun)
GTE 파운더인 엔조는 열심히 ZRO를 실링하고 있었습니다. 엔조도 기다리는 ZRO 10불 https://x.com/enzo_gte/status/2066479553992646752?s=20
Signed hj(jun)
😺 GTE 소식 업뎃 (High performance Perp DEX with L1) 현재 Stealth 모드로 빌딩 중이라는데 LayerZero 쪽과 협업해서 제품을 내놓는다고 합니다. GTE 쪽은 이미 빌딩이 끝난 상태고 LayerZero 쪽 준비를 기다리는듯? 대충 9월쯤에 뭔가 슬슬 나오려나 봄 GTE가 기술적으로 • Treasury(Zero) • Margine Engine(Minimmit) • SEZ(local validator) 이렇게 되어있거든요 아직 자세하게 공개되지는 않았지만, 자체 검증, 분산은 되어있는 블록체인이긴 할텐데 전부 rust native로 돌아가는 거래소일거에요 (By Jermain) 내가 이해한 바로는 Commonware.xyz 기술을 통해서 자체 합의를 가지는 L1 체인을 빌딩 하긴 하는데 실행 …
Signed hj(jun)
SEC의 볼트(vault) 및 렌딩 전략에 대한 성명서 친 암호화폐 성향을 가지고 있는 SEC 커미셔너인 헤스터 피어스(Hester Pierce)가 최근 크립토 산업에서 굉장히 각광받고 있는 볼트와 렌딩 전략에 대한 성명서를 최근에 발표했습니다. 핵심은 볼트가 스마트 컨트랙트로 자동화되어 운영되어있다 한들, 실질적으로 디플로이어 및 큐레이터가 운용에 얼마나 개입하는지에 따라서 증권 여부를 결정해야된다는 것입니다. 볼트가 차세대 자산운용의 핵심 프리미티브의 방향성으로 나아감에 따라 이것이 주류로 편입되기 이전에 증권인지 아닌지 확실히하고자하는 의지가 보이네요. 만약 볼트가 증권으로 판단될 경우 볼트 관련된 프로덕트, 큐레이터 등은 굉장히 골치가 아파질 것 같습니다. 전문 링크
Signed hj(jun)
레이어제로가 DVN 아티클을 게시했는데, 제목이 아주 노골적이네요 "엔터프라이즈 DVN: 세계 최대 기업들이 크로스체인 인프라를 운영하는 방법". 바닥 친 신뢰도 회복 하려고 애쓰는 중인데 아직 민심은 영 별로인듯 - 레이어제로는 애플리케이션이 원하는 검증기관(DVN)을 직접 선택해 크로스체인 보안 체계를 구성할 수 있는 구조를 제공 - Worldpay, Fidelity, Deutsche Telekom, Google Cloud 등 글로벌 기관들이 실제 운영 중인 DVN으로 참여해 결제, RWA, 유럽 규제 대응, 클라우드 신뢰 인프라를 제공 중 - 현재 네트워크에는 50개 이상의 DVN이 운영되며, 기업은 규제와 보안 요구에 맞게 원하는 검증자를 자유롭게 조합 가능 - 토큰화 자산과 스테이블코인 발행사는 Worldpay나 Fidel…
Signed hj(jun)
이게 어케 가능한거죠, 무슨 돈으로 주는거죠 이거
Signed hj(jun)
저는 롤렉스 절대 재고 안내줘서 재테크에 좋다는 샤넬 클래식백으로 재테크 완. 포장도 안풀고 보관예정. 올라DAO
Signed hj(jun)
우연히 제로 메인넷 출시 시점과 겹치는 dtcc의 토큰화 서비스 https://x.com/rookie_of_ph/status/2077693594689733072?s=46
Signed hj(jun)
로빈후드 체인 크로스 체인 별 규모 LayerZero - $455M Across - $117M Chainlink ccip: $31M https://x.com/rookie_of_Ph/status/2077357509200015410?s=20
Signed hj(jun)
제시 폴락 베이스 앱 나가고 코비가 맡는다고 합니다. 앞으로는 거래, 결제, 에이전트에 집중하며, 거래에는 토큰화된 주식, 밈코인, 앱 코인 다 포함된다고 하네요. 최근 베이스에 대한 비판과 로빈후드의 하입?에 영향을 받은 것으로 보입니다. 사람들은 코비 강아지랑 고양이에 관심 갖는 중. 로빈후드 아크에 관심가 있는 베이스로 유동성이 갈지는 의문이네요 아래는 제시 트윗 요약 - 베이스는 지난 2년간 빌더와 온체인 소셜에 베팅했지만, 맞은 것은 빌더였고 소셜은 완전히 실패했다. - 그 결과 퍼프·예측시장·토큰화·결제 등 핵심 분야에서 경쟁사에 뒤처졌고, 올해는 전략을 전면 수정하는 계기가 됐다. - 이제 목표는 '소셜 체인'이 아니라 글로벌 금융을 위한 블록체인이다. 스테이블코인, 예측시장, 퍼프, 토큰화가 대중 채택을 이끌 것으로 본…
Signed hj(jun)
헉
Signed hj(jun)
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @mid_curve. 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 — 186,039 of 1,189,255entries 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.
“Mid-curve Research” (@mid_curve), 786 subscribers as measured 7 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/mid_curve.
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.