Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for bupt.moe

Channel

bupt.moe

@bupt_moe

On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

5,112subscribers

+164 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001354666320
TypeChannel
Username@bupt_moe
Created4 January 2018measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (TGDataset)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live18 September 2026
Measurements held15
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 18 September 2026
On Telegramt.me/bupt_moe

Topic

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 13 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 57% 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

4,9485,1135,030.56 August 2026 — 4,948 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,948 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,951 subscribers9 August 2026 — 4,954 subscribers12 August 2026 — 4,966 subscribers16 August 2026 — 4,980 subscribers20 August 2026 — 4,988 subscribers23 August 2026 — 5,002 subscribers26 August 2026 — 5,024 subscribers29 August 2026 — 5,088 subscribers2 September 2026 — 5,101 subscribers5 September 2026 — 5,106 subscribers10 September 2026 — 5,105 subscribers14 September 2026 — 5,113 subscribers18 September 2026 — 5,112 subscribers5,1126 August 202618 September 2026
15 measurements spanning 43 days, net +164. 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 4,923–5,138 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
18 Sept 2026, 05:195,112-1
14 Sept 2026, 08:555,113+8
10 Sept 2026, 22:155,105-1
5 Sept 2026, 19:165,106+5
2 Sept 2026, 03:175,101+13
29 Aug 2026, 20:555,088+64
26 Aug 2026, 19:345,024+22
23 Aug 2026, 13:445,002+14
20 Aug 2026, 01:524,988+8
16 Aug 2026, 16:444,980+14
12 Aug 2026, 22:464,966+12
9 Aug 2026, 22:114,954+3
6 Aug 2026, 18:304,951+3
6 Aug 2026, 03:484,948no change
6 Aug 2026, 02:184,948first reading

Engagement

23 posts held, back to 23 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 8 pages of 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 23 posts for this entry, the most recent from 11 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.

Reaction mix

648 reactions across 20 posts, in 22 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 14.2% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
😭9214.2%
😁8212.7%
🤓8012.3%
🥰649.88%
😱548.33%
🫡487.41%
👍477.25%
335.09%
🌚335.09%
👀314.78%
🔥223.40%
😇152.31%
👎101.54%
💯81.23%
🤔71.08%
🤯60.926%
🌭40.617%
🤡40.617%
30.463%
❤‍🔥20.309%
2 further kinds30.463%

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 21 of the 23 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 659 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 23 July 2026 to 11 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.

Recent posts

9 Aug 2026, 05:00 UTC≈1,340 views47 reactionsread 12 August 2026

给读者讲一下韩杰医生这个案子的严重性:医疗事故鉴定报告是由一群高年资医生出的。一级甲等事故并且是医生负主责的报告,必然是整个医生群体都看不下去,洗无可洗的情况下才会出的。

👀31👎10🤔3🤡2😁1

7 Aug 2026, 03:36 UTC≈2,090 views49 reactionsread 12 August 2026

#security #cryptography 牛逼,如果这个论文没问题格密码直接out,期待有密码学专业的读者评论。 https://eprint.iacr.org/2026/1591

😱43🤯4🤓2

5 Aug 2026, 14:37 UTC≈2,100 views39 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

#群友骚话 注:下方群友是飞行员

🔥22🌚11🌭41🤡1

2 Aug 2026, 16:17 UTC≈4,550 views8 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

#群友骚话 注:第一句的空对空是指在空中拍摄空中景物

🌚7😇1

30 Jul 2026, 13:46 UTC≈2,520 views36 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Photo, posted without a caption

🥰351

29 Jul 2026, 12:42 UTC≈2,280 views14 reactionsread 12 August 2026

至于AI safety,本文因其原作者所限没有谈到的一个领域是——军事。这方面的发展对大众来说基本上是不可见的。笔者认为是极不乐观的。

😇14

29 Jul 2026, 12:42 UTC≈1,890 views5 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @prdm_thoughts

书接上文。AI对公安和Staatssicherheit工作真正的影响是什么呢。 AI真正的大问题之一,它是回音壁(echo chamber),哪怕你通过提示词让AI跟你展开精神分析和自我批评,按目前训练的风格他就是会align到人类,会刻意去迎合你的,而显然,越垃圾的AI,它就越迎合你。遑论更多使用AI(豆包)的人根本意识不到这一点,他觉得这是个助手,可能有点像给领导开车的司机或者大秘的角色,搁那聊,给自己聊进去了。对于ego稍微大点的人(尤其是各类领导),这种激化放大个人意见巩固自信的效应会更加增强。 那对于本身精神状态就异乎常人的用户,比如本来就玉玉的小孩,比如反人类人格有杀心的用户,AI的道德围栏的优先级是远小于遵从用户的优先级的,最后确实可能导致异常情况会被放大。 再比如在国内企业从事AI safety工作的读者应该知道,今年有司也重点排查了情感陪伴类的AI,懂的都懂。并不是说对AI产生情感陪伴依赖是错误的,但是我们整个

5

29 Jul 2026, 01:37 UTC≈1,990 views10 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

不行了,有人现身说法了

🥰91

Showing the 12 most recent of 23 posts we hold for @bupt_moe. 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

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.

Mentions

Named by 1 registered channel — 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.

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.

每日消费电子观察
@CE_Observe · 74,794
Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 62 here — alongside 61 others — read 19 August 2026
竹新社
@tnews365 · 164,267
Telegram ranks this channel #32 of 59 here — alongside 58 others — read 12 August 2026
风向旗参考快讯
@xhqcankao · 163,238
Telegram ranks this channel #35 of 45 here — alongside 44 others — read 12 August 2026
每日沙雕墙
@woshadiao · 115,324
Telegram ranks this channel #43 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 14 August 2026
LoopDNS资讯播报
@DNSPODT · 71,856
Telegram ranks this channel #48 of 59 here — alongside 58 others — read 20 August 2026

This channel appears in 5 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 18 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“bupt.moe” (@bupt_moe), 5,112 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/bupt_moe.

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.