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 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 76% 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 the other topics.
Observations
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Content that also appears on other registered channels
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 2 other registered channels. This entry also forms a group of 2 channels linked by matching posts. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
Matching posts — open both and compare (6 of the pairs behind the counts below)
Channels this entry shares post bodies with, where at least one matching post pair has no forward credit between the two channels, or to a common source, recorded in our data
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 798 comparable posts for this entry, running 4 August 2026 to 10 November 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).
Of the group of 2 channels, the one whose matching posts we hold earliest is @solidot — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 11 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
Channels linked by matching posts
This channel is in a group of 2 registered channels linked by matching posts. Links are found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown in this list. “First” could only mean first in our own crawl, which depends on how deep we happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. Our one hand-check read 45 of the highest-confidence flagged pairs against the live Telegram pages. In 18 of them the live page showed a “Forwarded from” credit that our database had no record of, so reading that pair as an unattributed copy was wrong; the check did not measure who published first. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Near-verbatim 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.
64 measurements spanning 98 days, net +4,467. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 43,672–49,496 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 64
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
11 Nov 2026, 16:10
48,811
-1
9 Nov 2026, 16:59
48,812
-12
8 Nov 2026, 05:59
48,824
+35
6 Nov 2026, 21:29
48,789
+404
5 Nov 2026, 23:15
48,385
+483
4 Nov 2026, 22:36
47,902
+34
3 Nov 2026, 19:31
47,868
+11
2 Nov 2026, 21:46
47,857
+14
2 Nov 2026, 00:54
47,843
+13
1 Nov 2026, 01:50
47,830
+13
31 Oct 2026, 03:28
47,817
+15
30 Oct 2026, 01:07
47,802
+9
29 Oct 2026, 03:40
47,793
-4
28 Oct 2026, 00:26
47,797
+11
27 Oct 2026, 02:08
47,786
+16
26 Oct 2026, 02:11
47,770
+17
25 Oct 2026, 01:56
47,753
+8
24 Oct 2026, 04:40
47,745
+4
23 Oct 2026, 02:17
47,741
+26
22 Oct 2026, 01:49
47,715
first reading
Engagement
806 posts held, back to 4 August 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 194 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
5.80%
avg views ÷ 48,811 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,830
245 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.43%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
245
of 806 held
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.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 November 2026
Posts held
806 (4 August 2026 – 11 November 2026)
Views total
693,370
Reactions total
9,906
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
11 Nov 2026, 12:09 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.
Reaction mix
33,457 reactions across 791 posts, in 61 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 15.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
5,261
15.7%
🤡
4,270
12.8%
🤣
2,647
7.91%
🔥
2,006
6.00%
🖕
1,940
5.80%
🤮
1,372
4.10%
💊
1,371
4.10%
👎
1,317
3.94%
🤯
1,019
3.05%
❤
916
2.74%
😢
894
2.67%
🎉
877
2.62%
🤪
727
2.17%
😭
661
1.98%
🫡
653
1.95%
😱
650
1.94%
😨
639
1.91%
🥰
619
1.85%
🤬
456
1.36%
🕊
442
1.32%
41 further kinds
4,720
14.1%
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 806 of the 806 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 33,978 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 806 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 11 November 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 1 of 245 posts held from the last 30 days (0.408%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
AI 生成的代码并不可靠
2026-11-11 18:43 by 被涂污的鸟
一位 100% 依赖 AI 生成代码的资深开发者认为 AI 生成的代码库无法满足高可用、高扩展性 SaaS 应用的需求。原因包括:AI 写的测试过于简单,无法覆盖真正重要的使用场景;AI 写的代码过于复杂,经常引入两三个辅助方法,实际上一个就够了,这种复杂性增加了理解代码或进行调试的难度;人类程序员难以理解 AI 生成的代码库,一家企业依赖 AI 生成代码库的时间越长,真正理解代码库的程序员就越少;AI 产出速度太快,无法维持高质量标准,人工审核的时间越来越短,从而会造成长期的技术债务。AI 生成的代码库会导致更多故障,而故障修复的时间会越来越长。
https://evanxmerz.com/post/ai-usage-generates-a-fragile-codebase/
#评论
Michael John Harrison 成为首位获得布克奖的科幻作家
2026-11-11 15:02 by 空气的颜色
81 岁的哈里森(Michael John Harrison)成为首位获得布克奖的科幻作家,也是获得布克奖的最年长作家。他的获奖作品是末日小说《The End of Everything》,故事设定在一场无人能正确解释的灾难后数十年,地点是英国的肯特郡海岸,讲诉了 Phillip Tennent 和年迈的姑姑 Marnie 在神秘的 iGhetti 带来的威胁下艰难求生。Ghetti 是一种庞大且能不断变形的生物,其起源和意图未给出说明。哈里森的创作生涯长达六十年,其年龄超过了 2019 年的布克奖得主 Margaret Atwood——时年 79 岁。布克奖基金会 CEO Gaby Wood 表示,尽管此前已有不少获奖者涉足过科幻文学,但哈里森是第一位真正来自科幻界的布克奖得主。
https://…
AMD 公布 Zen 6 CPU 细节
2026-11-11 14:25 by 团圆奇遇
AMD 披露了 Zen 6 CPU 家族的细节。从表面看,Zen 6 是 Zen 5 的自然演进,核心扩展了乱序执行结构以及其它方面的迭代改进。但深入内部会发现 AMD 对核心的多个方面进行了重构,其改进类似从 Zen 1 到 Zen 2。 Zen 6 分支预测错误开销从 Zen 5 的 3.5-4 纳秒缩短到了 3-3.5 纳秒,降低了分支预测错误延迟。Zen 6 能在 L1 指令缓存内实现每周期处理 2 个分支,指令足迹超出 L1 缓存容量后会降至每周期处理 1 个分支,Zen 6 主要提升了分支目标缓冲器(BTB)的速度而非容量。Zen 6 的分支预测单元精确度接近 Zen 5,执行速度则更快。Zen 5 单线程只能使用一个解码集群,而 Zen 6 提升到了单线程能使用两个解码集群。Zen 6 在整数运算上恢复了 Zen 4 的 …
中国 Android 厂商开始要求开发者身份验证
2026-11-10 19:18 by 诺比的微型反重力装置
Google 从今年 9 月起要求验证所有 Android 应用开发者的身份,未经身份验证的开发者的应用未来将无法在 Android 设备上安装(sideload)。Google 官方博客声称它是出于安全理由要求验证开发者身份,理由是其分析显示来自第三方源的恶意应用数量是 Google Play 的 90 多倍。现在,中国主要 Android 厂商也启动了开发者身份验证:OPPO、vivo、小米、荣耀推出 Android 侧载应用开发者身份验证(Android Developer Verification,简称 ADV),支持各方验证结果互认。ADV 旨在建立开发者与其应用之间的可信关联,为用户识别应用来源、判断应用是否安全提供依据。
OPPO:https://open.oppomobile.com/docume…
🤬87🥱9💯5🔥3🆒1
Showing the 12 most recent of 806 posts we hold for @solidot. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@solidot edited 2 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
30 August 2026
Most recent edit
20 September 2026
Forward network
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.
Mentions
Named by 8 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.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 28 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
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.
Iyouport @iyouport · 27,612 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 55 here — alongside 54 others — read 10 September 2026
中国数字时代 @cdtchinesefeed · 51,934 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 29 August 2026
Time经济观察 @TimeHorizonX · 21,049 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 54 here — alongside 53 others — read 25 September 2026
cnBeta.COM中文业界资讯站 - 总频道(精选新闻) @cnbeta_com · 27,407 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 55 here — alongside 54 others — read 10 September 2026
Appinn Feed|小众软件 @appinnfeed · 34,958 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 4 September 2026
少数派sspai @sspai · 39,123 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 58 here — alongside 57 others — read 31 August 2026
看鉴中国 OutsightChina @OutsightChina · 41,872 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 58 here — alongside 57 others — read 29 August 2026
飛蛾書庫 @MothLib · 35,344 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 50 here — alongside 49 others — read 3 September 2026
即刻精选 @jike_collection · 35,883 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 48 here — alongside 47 others — read 2 September 2026
zaobao.sg 早报 @zaobaosg · 46,565 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 59 here — alongside 58 others — read 1 September 2026
小声读书 🙈 @weekly_books · 38,252 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 59 here — alongside 58 others — read 31 August 2026
每日消费电子观察 @CE_Observe · 77,552 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 62 here — alongside 61 others — read 19 August 2026
竹新社 @tnews365 · 167,192 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 59 here — alongside 58 others — read 12 August 2026
知乎暴论 @mightyflame · 25,397 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 42 here — alongside 41 others — read 13 September 2026
树洞🌳群友问❓有点意思🗳 @qunyouwen · 89,042 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 67 here — alongside 66 others — read 17 August 2026
科技&趣闻&杂记 @kejiqu · 36,774 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 48 here — alongside 47 others — read 1 September 2026
Newlearnerの自留地 @NewlearnerChannel · 68,274 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 62 here — alongside 61 others — read 21 August 2026
赛博忏悔室 @cyber_confessional · 40,952 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 35 here — alongside 34 others — read 30 August 2026
简中互联网废物大赏 @fucku_idiot · 41,768 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 47 here — alongside 46 others — read 30 August 2026
蓝点网订阅频道 @landiansub · 47,142 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 58 here — alongside 57 others — read 28 August 2026
LoopDNS资讯播报 @DNSPODT · 73,241 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 59 here — alongside 58 others — read 20 August 2026
电报时报 @times001 · 84,497 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 66 here — alongside 65 others — read 18 August 2026
风向旗参考快讯 @xhqcankao · 200,273 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 45 here — alongside 44 others — read 12 August 2026
TG吃瓜黑料八卦 @baguabox · 33,150 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 38 here — alongside 37 others — read 4 September 2026
This channel appears in 69 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.
Cite this entry
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 11 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Solidot” (@solidot), 48,811 subscribers as measured 11 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/solidot.
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.