Channel
@vitamineEpodcast
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
8,514subscribers
-5 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001357893784 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @vitamineEpodcast |
| Description | 精神分析漫步学派（The casualistic school of psychoanalysis） 生命需要维生素e！ 维生素e是一款完全免费的知识分享播客计划，我们分享构成这个世界，解释这个世界，创造这个世界的基础知识，并在基础上试图分析终极问题。 我们相信真理的普遍性，相信人和人之间可以相互理解。相信我们最终，可以通达真理。 收听方式：各大播客平台搜索 维生素E |
| Created | 23 January 2020 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (TGDataset) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 11 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 11 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/vitamineEpodcast |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 11 Aug 2026, 00:41 | 8,514 | -6 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 14:53 | 8,520 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 21:15 | 8,519 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 27 April 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 12 pagesof 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 2 July 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
574 reactions across 20 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 36.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 211 | 36.8% | |
| 😁 | 153 | 26.7% | |
| 👍 | 109 | 19.0% | |
| 🤩 | 33 | 5.75% | |
| 🔥 | 27 | 4.70% | |
| 👎 | 20 | 3.48% | |
| 🤮 | 15 | 2.61% | |
| 😢 | 6 | 1.05% |
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 574reactions 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 27 April 2025 to 2 July 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.
我其实不太理解为什么claude那么执着于锁区，如果他只是想做锁区这件事的话，投入和产出根本不成正比，锁区意味着识别用户到底是哪个地区，这个从互联网基础设置而言几乎就是不可能的工作，因为云服务器是开放的，国际信道是开放的，人员的国际流动是开放的，且多数国家的kyc和美国不通，证件伪造成本极低而识别成本极高。 有空做这些不如识别用户行为，发现蒸馏或者其他类似行为依照行为逻辑封号没人说它什么，但非按地区逻辑限制，把精力和资金花在这上面，只能是说有执念了，那这个执念是怎么来的呢
👍18😢3❤2🔥1
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/cErbT9MVykZuYK-NTRDuZg 漫步学派 小程序已经开始公测，公众号会定期发送邀请码（今天就会发一波），有兴趣体验的朋友可以关注 #vibecoding #精神分析
❤11👍4
🔬 Token 经济学：用便宜的 Token 替代贵的 Token，到底行不行？ 最近一直在思考一个问题：LLM 的 token 是有质量分层的。Opus 4.6 输出的是"高质量 token"，本地跑的开源模型输出的是"低质量 token"。那能不能通过多 agent 协作、多次采样，用数量换质量？ 研究了一圈文献，结论是：有条件地可以，但有硬天花板。 ⸻ 📈 好消息：小模型确实能超越大模型 Snell et al.（ICLR 2025）发现，在 FLOP 匹配的评估中，小模型通过增加 test-time compute 可以超越参数量大 14 倍的模型。另一篇 ICLR 2025 的论文显示，Llemma-7B 配合 tree search，在 MATH benchmark 上始终优于 Llemma-34B。 关键条件：模型对目标任务得有非零的成功率，而且你得有一个靠谱的 verifier。 ⸻ 🚫 硬天花板：No Fre…
❤26
另外再补两句，首先open claw如果安装在云服务器，那就是一个纯噱头，还不如Gemini网页版，如果安装在Windows，那只能用wls2跑，和放云服务器没啥区别，只有mac可以发挥作用因为applescript的存在可以和很多应用完成交互。但为这玩意买个mac确实不值。不如冲claude code的会员。 另外，如果配国产模型再不翻墙，这玩意和没有基本没区别。
❤12
最近很多人在问openclaw，我确实也在用，但其实99%的人根本用不到这个东西，openclaw适合的是离线场景，但可能最需要的不是离线场景而是在线场景，先在在线场景中把skill编好跑通，变成可复用的工作流，才会考虑离线场景。而大部分人在线场景都没搞明白，那玩openclaw就是纯白玩。 如果真的有兴趣用agent增加自己的生产力，那先把终端软件和ide都玩清楚，openclaw比ide唯一强的地方只有afk的时候能交互，别的没有了
🔥15❤3
另外我已经没有印象婴儿这个词我后面加没加死字了，有可能传出来的是吃活的。。。。
❤6😢3
突然想起一个很有趣的小事，之前在法国留学的时候，和同学聊天，聊到中国的一些习俗，当时不知道哪根筋短路了，从吃的聊到了广东吃的很好吃然后聊到了广东什么都吃最后说广东还有有人吃死婴，还说的信誓旦旦。 我现在还能回想起来那位法国同学震惊的眼神。如果我那个法国同学也是法国版的牢A的话，可能这件事就会成为法国网络界的一个对中国的小故事吧，给广东人泼脏水了真是对不起😞
😁37👎14❤4
#每日语言辨析 这是真分不清自己的欲望和大他者的欲望了
😁35🤮10❤1
维生素E2.0 -01：回响 Host： VE Contact 联系方式： DY：维生素E 经济学哲学知识分享 VX：vitaminEhelper 漫步小助手 公众号：漫步学派
❤26
没录完，预计明天或者后天发新节目
❤15
祝大家新年快乐，最近一直在改bug和增加小程序功能，所以播客确实没时间更新，等项目基本稳定了（就这两天的事）,就发新播客，维生素2.0第一期
❤25🤩4🔥2
今日内测已正式开始，欢迎持续报名，还有三个名额
❤6🔥2
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @vitamineEpodcast. 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 3 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
大家阅读电子书的时候，更喜欢什么格式？
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
当前的环境下（2025.06），你认为有必要本地部署大模型吗？
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
目前哪个ai生态最好用
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 27 April 2025 to 2 July 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank — 429,472 of 1,176,251entries 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.
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.
Named by 3 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.
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 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“维生素E|经济学哲学知识分享播客” (@vitamineEpodcast), 8,514 subscribers as measured 11 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/vitamineEpodcast.
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.