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 100% 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Growth
50 measurements spanning 80 days, net +1,272. 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 36,063–37,717 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 50
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
25 Oct 2026, 00:16
37,526
+23
24 Oct 2026, 01:49
37,503
+1
22 Oct 2026, 23:54
37,502
+8
21 Oct 2026, 19:36
37,494
+18
20 Oct 2026, 18:01
37,476
+2
19 Oct 2026, 18:21
37,474
+10
18 Oct 2026, 17:39
37,464
+19
17 Oct 2026, 20:18
37,445
+16
16 Oct 2026, 23:09
37,429
+14
15 Oct 2026, 23:01
37,415
-4
14 Oct 2026, 23:51
37,419
+14
13 Oct 2026, 20:47
37,405
+46
10 Oct 2026, 08:35
37,359
+46
6 Oct 2026, 03:36
37,313
+37
30 Sept 2026, 21:19
37,276
+146
18 Sept 2026, 08:57
37,130
+99
16 Sept 2026, 03:36
37,031
+34
14 Sept 2026, 09:16
36,997
+43
12 Sept 2026, 17:57
36,954
+2
10 Sept 2026, 20:00
36,952
first reading
Engagement
2,007 posts held, back to 5 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 150 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
0.788%
avg views ÷ 37,526 subscribers
Avg views / post
296
833 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.544%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
833
of 2,007 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. It is computed over the 410 of 833 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 25 October 2026
Posts held
2,007 (5 August 2026 – 25 October 2026)
Views total
246,385
Reactions total
691
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
25 Oct 2026, 20:16 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
Photos
≈15,500
Videos
≈1,690
Links
≈6,930
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 25 October 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Video runtime
1h 28m
Average length
24s
Measured directly from 226 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
802 reactions across 453 posts, in 19 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 42.4% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
340
42.4%
🖕
298
37.2%
❤
99
12.3%
🤡
19
2.37%
👎
9
1.12%
💩
7
0.873%
🤣
7
0.873%
🤔
4
0.499%
🥰
3
0.374%
💯
2
0.249%
😁
2
0.249%
😭
2
0.249%
🤩
2
0.249%
🤮
2
0.249%
🤯
2
0.249%
🍾
1
0.125%
👏
1
0.125%
🗿
1
0.125%
🤨
1
0.125%
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 474 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 802 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 20 September 2026 to 25 October 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
2
across the posts below
Posts paid on
2
of 1,000 we hold a reading for · 0.2%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @aigc1024. 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 20 September 2026 to 25 October 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.
、Foundry、Frontier Machines、General Instinct、一次黑客松、Intuition.dev、Omakase、robot.com、Ultra 和 Yondu。
**部署情况**:上面多数应用,从日本、瑞士到美国各地,都是通过 API 走云端推理跑的。这些早期部署也暴露了要改进的地方,比如有些场景网络连接不稳定。
**从反馈中改进**:模型用得越多,Pi 越清楚它在真实场景里的能力和局限,下一代就能更通用。但真实任务的范围太大,机器人建筑、机器人手术、仓储自动化,每一个都够撑起一家公司。如果每个应用都要从零解决物理智能问,难度就没法承受。开放 API 既能加速整个机器人生态,也能加深 Pi 自己对物理智能的理解。
**结论**:这些例子说明 Pi 的模型已经能用在真实、有用的场景里,合作方也能用 API 独立迭代策略、提升自主能力。现在还早,后续版本会根据开发者反馈来定。想参加 Beta 可以去官…
从明天起,做一个落后的人
写字,跑步,看着世界
从明天起,关心粮食和蔬菜
我有一所房子,面朝大海,没有 AI
- 风言风语的 AI 作业本
@aigc1024
Showing the 12 most recent of 2,007 posts we hold for @aigc1024. 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.
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 17 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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
1
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
1
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
0
vacant every time we have ever looked
@aigc1024 named 1 handle 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.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
@ziweifancha7 named in 47 posts, 8 August 2026 – 19 October 2026 · confirmed gone 11 October 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
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.
ahhhhfs|A姐分享 @abskoop · 304,598 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 50 here — alongside 49 others — read 17 August 2026
黑洞资源笔记 @piracy6 · 77,783 Telegram ranks this channel #22 of 61 here — alongside 60 others — read 19 August 2026
Widget🏂软件工具资源分享 @WidgetChannel · 104,867 Telegram ranks this channel #22 of 44 here — alongside 43 others — read 17 August 2026
极客分享 @geekshare · 65,236 Telegram ranks this channel #23 of 44 here — alongside 43 others — read 21 August 2026
黑科技软件资源分享 @kkaifenxiang · 261,396 Telegram ranks this channel #32 of 39 here — alongside 38 others — read 19 August 2026
油油の科技软件资源分享 @youyousharechannel · 91,971 Telegram ranks this channel #34 of 43 here — alongside 42 others — read 17 August 2026
This channel appears in 6 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. 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 25 October 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“AI探索指南” (@aigc1024), 37,526 subscribers as measured 25 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/aigc1024.
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.