Channel
@idea_memo
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
8,829subscribers
+161 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001936992599 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @idea_memo |
| Created | Between 1 April 2023 and 31 October 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 9 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 12 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 9 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/idea_memo |
Other / unclassifiable — 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 20 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 56% 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 9 Sept 2026, 18:15 | 8,829 | +17 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 20:16 | 8,812 | +13 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 10:06 | 8,799 | +20 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 20:33 | 8,779 | +27 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 13:04 | 8,752 | +8 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 08:58 | 8,744 | +23 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 05:44 | 8,721 | +7 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 11:38 | 8,714 | +33 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 13:47 | 8,681 | -9 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 03:54 | 8,690 | +21 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 02:00 | 8,669 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 03:05 | 8,668 | first reading |
319 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 28 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
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 84 of 253 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 28 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 319 (5 August 2026 – 28 August 2026) |
| Views total | 178,149 |
| Reactions total | 185 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 28 Aug 2026, 16:17 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.
Measured directly from 7 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.
258 reactions across 90 posts, in 18 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 43.4% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 112 | 43.4% | |
| 👍 | 56 | 21.7% | |
| 🤬 | 20 | 7.75% | |
| 😁 | 15 | 5.81% | |
| 😭 | 11 | 4.26% | |
| 🤡 | 7 | 2.71% | |
| 👏 | 6 | 2.33% | |
| 🤣 | 6 | 2.33% | |
| 🔥 | 5 | 1.94% | |
| 🙏 | 4 | 1.55% | |
| ❤🔥 | 3 | 1.16% | |
| 🗿 | 3 | 1.16% | |
| 🫡 | 3 | 1.16% | |
| 👌 | 2 | 0.775% | |
| 🤯 | 2 | 0.775% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 0.388% | |
| ✍ | 1 | 0.388% | |
| 😱 | 1 | 0.388% |
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 115 of the 319 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 267 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 319 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 28 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.
트럼프 행정부, 새로운 AI 칩 수출 규정 마련 중 미 상무부는 중국 AI 기업들이 태국과 싱가포르 등 해외 데이터센터에 설치된 미국산 첨단 칩을 원격으로 사용하는 것을 차단하기 위한 정책을 마련하고 있습니다. 해당 규정은 데이터센터 운영사에 고객확인(KYC) 절차 이행을 요구하고, 첨단 칩을 공급받는 조건으로 중국 측의 접근을 제한하도록 할 수 있습니다. 이는 중국 기업들이 칩을 물리적으로 수입하지 않고도 규제 대상 컴퓨팅 자원을 사용할 수 있게 해온 허점을 사실상 겨냥한 조치입니다. https://x.com/wallstengine/status/2093323778944287095?s=20
Russia's Gasoline output fell to about 70% of domestic consumption at the end of August - Sources (@BreakingMarketNews)
● 잭슨홀, 생각보다 매파적이지만 AI 인프라의 방향은 바뀌지 않았다 1. 케빈 워시 연설의 핵심 워시는 현재 미국 경제를 완전고용에 가까운 견조한 경기로 평가하면서, 연준의 최우선 과제는 여전히 물가라고 강조했습니다. 7월 PCE가 전년 대비 3.7%, 최근 6개월 연율 4.1%에 달하는 만큼 인플레이션이 2%를 향해 충분한 속도로 내려온다는 확신이 없다면 추가적인 정책 대응이 필요하다는 입장입니다. 다만 특정 시점의 금리 인상을 예고하는 포워드 가이던스는 피했습니다. 2. 시장 기대와 비교하면 ‘약한 매파’ 최근 높은 물가와 워시의 성향을 감안해 시장도 어느 정도 매파적 발언을 예상하고 있었습니다. 실제 연설은 기대보다 조금 강했고, 직후 9월 금리 인상 기대가 높아지며 2년물 금리가 상승했습니다. 다만 명확한 추가 인상 신호나 공…
$CRAK 부진정유곤곤래.. ㄷㄷ
$NVDA 엔비디아, 반도체 섹터와 거의 독립적으로 움직여 - 인텔($INTC)은 필반 지수($SOXX)와 가장 상관계수가 높았다더라
외국인의 관점(달러 기준)에서 전닉 주가를 보면 6/18 삼성전자 종가 기준 최고가 362,500원 * $1/1537.56원 = 약 $235.8 7/1 삼성전자 종가 314,500원 * $1/1,551.8원 = 약 $202.7 8/28 삼성전자 종가 257,000원 * $1/1,378.6원 = 약 $186.4 달러로 삼성전자 금일 종가 기준 MDD는 -20.9%인데 $MU 최고가 $1,255 대비 현재 작성시점 기준 주가 $944로 MDD 계산하면 -24.8% 환 효과까지 감안해서 주가 하락률을 보면 국장이 생각보다 잘 버틴, 그러니까 마이크론 대비 전닉 주가가 그렇게 억울할 건 없다는 결론이 될 수도 생각보다 환율을 감안하면 실적 추정치든 주가든 재밌는 현상들이 많음
환율 자체는 본질적인 펀더멘털 요소라고 볼 수는 없을 수 있지만, 실적 추정치에 영향을 주는 걸 감안하면 수출주들의 단기 추정치엔 부정적인 쪽으로, 내수주들엔 긍정적인 쪽으로 작용할 것 그러면 흔히 잘나가는 수출주는 주도주로서 멀티플도 땡겨받기 좋았을 것인데 고멀티플인 상황에서 추정치가 하향 여지가 발생하는 것이고 반대로 내수주는 저멀티플을 받던 상황에서 추정치가 상승할 여지가 발생하는 그림 원화 강세에 따른 반도체 모멘텀 약화는 달러 환율 하락에 따른 전닉 실적 추정치 하향 조정 가능성이 반영되는 걸수도? 그렇다면 개인적으로는 성장하는 내수주가 뭐가 있을지 찾아보는 건 어떨까 싶음
반도체주, 아직 ‘원화 강세’의 영향 끝나지 않았을 수 있다 크레이머는 원화 강세와 반도체 섹터 모멘텀 약화 사이에 강한 기술적 상관관계가 있다고 지적했다. 원화 강세가 코스피 지수(EWY)와 더 광범위한 반도체 거래 모두에 계속 부담을 줄 수 있다는 점도 강조했다.
💥[속보] 워시 “물가 2%로 빠르게 안 내려가면 할 일 있다”
💥[속보]워시 "AI로 슈퍼 무어의 법칙 같은 현상 일어나고 있다"
💥[속보] 케빈 워시 잭슨홀 연설 “AI는 몇년전에 예상보다 훨씬더 빠르게 성장…너무나 많은 자금이 AI 인프라에 들어오고 있다. 혁신의 속도 폭이 달라지고 있다”
💥[속보] 워시 연준의장 "현 금융여건, 긴축적이라 보기 어려워"
Showing the 12 most recent of 319 posts we hold for @idea_memo. 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.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
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.
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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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 9 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“메모장” (@idea_memo), 8,829 subscribers as measured 9 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/idea_memo.
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.