Technology — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 19 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 53% 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 1 other registered channel. 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 5,353 comparable posts for this entry, running 12 November 2015 to 11 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 @techsparks — 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 12 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.
62 measurements spanning 99 days, net +633. 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 46,006–46,892 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 62
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
12 Nov 2026, 17:55
46,744
+8
10 Nov 2026, 13:09
46,736
-12
8 Nov 2026, 23:47
46,748
-17
7 Nov 2026, 18:44
46,765
-2
6 Nov 2026, 15:47
46,767
-18
5 Nov 2026, 12:55
46,785
-5
4 Nov 2026, 10:15
46,790
+10
2 Nov 2026, 13:44
46,780
+2
1 Nov 2026, 12:40
46,778
-5
31 Oct 2026, 11:55
46,783
+8
30 Oct 2026, 12:56
46,775
-1
29 Oct 2026, 16:27
46,776
-10
28 Oct 2026, 13:21
46,786
+16
25 Oct 2026, 16:05
46,770
-2
24 Oct 2026, 18:47
46,772
-1
23 Oct 2026, 18:37
46,773
-1
22 Oct 2026, 21:16
46,774
+8
21 Oct 2026, 14:46
46,766
-8
20 Oct 2026, 13:46
46,774
-4
19 Oct 2026, 14:39
46,778
first reading
Engagement
5,555 posts held, back to 12 November 2015 — the reader has reached the start of this channel’s public history, so this is the full archive Telegram still exposes. Read across 552 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
17.4%
avg views ÷ 46,744 subscribers
Avg views / post
8,140
41 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.10%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
41
of 5,555 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
5,555 (12 November 2015 – 11 November 2026)
Views total
333,550
Reactions total
3,653
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Nov 2026, 12:55 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.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
7m 21s
Average length
55s
Measured directly from 8 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
Reaction mix
11,413 reactions across 124 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 32.6% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
3,723
32.6%
👍
2,707
23.7%
🔥
2,170
19.0%
😁
1,214
10.6%
💩
1,049
9.19%
👏
323
2.83%
👎
165
1.45%
🤬
62
0.543%
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 999 of the 1,000 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 82,573 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 13 October 2024 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
71
across the posts below
Posts paid on
16
of 1,000 we hold a reading for · 2%
Most on one post
34
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @techsparks. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold for this entry (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 13 October 2024 to 11 November 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 10 of 41 posts held from the last 30 days (24.4%) 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).
Заголовок кликбейтный и неточный, как нынче популярно, а суть статьи интереснее:
Речь не о 80% всей документации интернета, как можно прочитать, а о 80% трафика на сайт с официальной разработческой документацией от 20 000 компаний, среди которых Anthropic, Microsoft и Amazon, например. Сейчас 80% трафика — от агентов, а в январе соотношение было обратным — преобладали люди.
Еще одна интересная иллюстрация к тезису …
Неделю назад писал здесь про интервью, в котором Фрай из OpenAI назвал неожиданно высокие цифры по количеству запросов к ChatGPT в сравнении с количеством запросов к Гуглу. Теперь это заявление смотрится как прогрев к более важному сообщению: ChatGPT открывает для бизнесов инструмент улучшения их видимости в ответах ChatGPT. Грубо это можно сравнить с карточками компаний в традиционных поисковых системах. Предлагает…
В конце прошлого года было много тревожных публикаций вокруг инцидентов с автономными автомобилями и школьными автобусами. Национальный транспортный регулятор (NHTSA) открыл расследование после сообщения о 19 (запомним эту цифру) случаях, в которых автономный автомобиль не остановился, как того требуют правила, перед школьным автобусом с предупреждающим сигналом о том, что идет посадка или высадка детей. Автомобили, …
Находка.
Awesome-REA – аккуратно собранный каталог про реверс-инжиниринг всего подряд, от сайтов и игр до прошивок и сетевых протоколов.
Репозиторию меньше месяца, в нем уже 1250 ресурсов, 431 разобранный кейс и 235 научных статей.
У каждой записи есть ссылки на источники, ограничения и пометка, помогал ли автору REA (агент для реверса, в честь которого назван список) или он обошелся своими инструментами. Весь кат…
Октябрьские бурления вокруг результатов в математике, полученных топовыми моделями в OpenAI и Anthropic, да еще и на фоне обсуждений про изменение привычных ролей и в разработке софта, и в бизнесе, послужили отправной точкой для очередной моей колонки в Forbes.
Поверхностный, логичный и потому популярный вывод — теперь роль человека смещается от генерации результата к его осмыслению и пониманию. В колонке он тоже при…
Интернет — нелепая мода, которая скоро пройдёт
Так в 1990-х британскому фантасту Дугласу Адамсу заявил журналист в эфире BBC. Автор «Автостопом по галактике» с таким прогнозом не согласился и позже написал эссе «Как перестать волноваться и полюбить интернет». В нём Адамс сформулировал три правила восприятия технологий:
🟣 Всё, что существовало до вашего рождения, — естественная часть мира.
🟣 Всё, что появляется до …
Я тут регулярно ссылаюсь на разные собственные исследования Anthropic на тему изменений, который из-за ИИ происходят в работе самой компании. Полезно сравнить с внешней аналитикой, как раз подоспела публикация от METR.
Главных выводов несколько, они — что важно — по существу совпадают с внутренней аналитикой Anthropic.
1. Начиная с осени 2025 способности моделей устойчиво растут вдвое быстрее, чем в предыдущий период…
Какой он — ИИ нового поколения?🧠
На III Международном симпозиуме «Создавая будущее», который пройдёт 12–13 ноября в Национальном центре «Россия», мы выступаем соорганизаторами сессии «Между творцом и творением: чего ждать от ИИ нового поколения».
На ней обсудим, каким должен быть ИИ, чтобы расширять возможности человека и оставаться эффективным инструментом для решения задач, а также этические принципы взаимодейств…
Статья в научном журнале с многообещающим названием Frontiers of Education с названием Still emerging: understanding Generative AI use in Higher Education («Всё ещё в стадии становления: понимание того, как используют генеративный ИИ в высшем образовании») опубликована в сентябре 2026 года.
Она посвящена анализу ответов, полученных в ходе анкетирования в апреле-июне 2024 года: Questionnaires were <…> simultaneously …
Три любопытные цифры на заметку, все из интервью с Адамом Фраем, который отвечает за розничные продукты ChatGPT
Во-первых, по его словам, число обрабатываемых поисковых запросов составляет 20% от числа запросов к Гуглу. (вроде бы другие оценки дают 10%, но это все равно очень много). Поисковыми он считает любые запросы, при ответе на которые надо было обратиться к вебпоиску прежде чем сформировать ответ.
Во-вторых, г…
Билл Гросс, основатель стартап-инкубатора Idealab, открыл бесплатный доступ к 1,2 млн (!) бизнес-идей, сформулированных ИИ по его собственной технологии . Гросс (как и все имеющие дело со стартапами) говорил не раз: для успеха бизнеса важнее не сама идея, а тайминг — выход на рынок в подходящий момент и прочие обстоятельства.
Прикольно полюбоваться на очень наглядное подтверждение тезиса “идея не стоит ничего!”
Гросс…
👍50😁22🔥19❤16💩2👏1
Showing the 12 most recent of 5,555 posts we hold for @techsparks. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Posts edited after publishing
@techsparks 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
23 October 2026
Most recent edit
2 November 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 25 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. The 24 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
18
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
0
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
18
vacant every time we have ever looked
@techsparks named 18 handles that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@rumlchannel named in 5 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@neuroscienceru named in 4 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@alexrb named in 3 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@prorobotics named in 2 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@techcube named in 2 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@devushkapassion named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@pgpompei named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@rsphd named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@bek_kendall named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@scum_sum named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@sokrispymedia named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@t_r_a_vladzhur named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@techfusionru named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@techmediachat named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@twibler named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@digitalchina named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@wander_with_willow named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@maxkurtz named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
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 27 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.
Tech Crunch @techcrunchru · 16,299 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 5 October 2026
involta - технологии, наука, будущее, IT, интернет! @involta · 33,698 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 3 September 2026
addmeto @addmeto · 72,013 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 20 August 2026
Малоизвестное интересное @theworldisnoteasy · 74,331 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 19 August 2026
Digital Доктор @tlgdoc · 29,116 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 8 September 2026
Грокс @groks · 42,490 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 29 August 2026
Denis Sexy IT 🤖 @denissexy · 140,845 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 13 August 2026
Fun Science @funscience · 34,182 Telegram ranks this channel #10 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 3 September 2026
запуск завтра @ctodaily · 33,704 Telegram ranks this channel #12 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 4 September 2026
42 секунды @ftsec · 19,385 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 2 October 2026
ПостНаука @postnauka · 22,296 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 99 here — alongside 98 others — read 23 September 2026
GPT/ChatGPT/AI Central Александра Горного @aioftheday · 44,704 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 29 August 2026
🤖 The Bell Tech @Bell_tech · 20,854 Telegram ranks this channel #15 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 26 September 2026
Мастриды @mustreads · 44,952 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 98 here — alongside 97 others — read 27 August 2026
Стартап дня. Александр Горный. @startupoftheday · 62,567 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 22 August 2026
e/acc @cryptoEssay · 63,674 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 21 August 2026
Техасский Вестник @starbasepost · 19,255 Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 4 October 2026
IT News | ИТ Новости | Техно @techno_news_tg · 20,038 Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 29 September 2026
Все о блокчейн/мозге/space/WEB 3.0 в России и мире @blockchainRF · 20,455 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 27 September 2026
ТЕХНО: Яндекс про технологии @techno_yandex · 218,253 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 11 August 2026
Двоичный кот @binarcat · 30,753 Telegram ranks this channel #19 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 9 September 2026
Сиолошная @seeallochnaya · 81,254 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 19 August 2026
Нецифровая экономика @antidigital · 24,479 Telegram ranks this channel #22 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 16 September 2026
Популярная механика ⚙️ @Popmeh · 29,458 Telegram ranks this channel #22 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 8 September 2026
This channel appears in 107 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 12 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“TechSparks” (@techsparks), 46,744 subscribers as measured 12 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/techsparks.
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.