Channel
@ijustseesee
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
2,855subscribers
+54 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001135559290 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @ijustseesee |
| Created | 15 March 2018 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (TGDataset) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 16 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 13 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 16 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/ijustseesee |
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 15 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 16 Sept 2026, 23:21 | 2,855 | +5 |
| 13 Sept 2026, 01:57 | 2,850 | +14 |
| 9 Sept 2026, 04:37 | 2,836 | +6 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 22:38 | 2,830 | +16 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 11:35 | 2,814 | -3 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 22:27 | 2,817 | +1 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 13:13 | 2,816 | +10 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 03:35 | 2,806 | +6 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 09:06 | 2,800 | -4 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 19:13 | 2,804 | +2 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 23:36 | 2,802 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 05:07 | 2,801 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 02:51 | 2,801 | first reading |
14 posts held, back to 20 July 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 2 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 14 posts for this entry, the most recent from 7 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Measured directly from 1 video 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.
23 reactions across 4 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 34.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🥰 | 8 | 34.8% | |
| ❤ | 7 | 30.4% | |
| 😁 | 5 | 21.7% | |
| 👍 | 2 | 8.70% | |
| 🙈 | 1 | 4.35% |
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 11 of the 14 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 86 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 14 most recent posts we hold, published 20 July 2026 to 7 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.
澎湃HyperOS 4 开机引导界面曝光 根据泄漏图与视频演示界面，新的系统支持： 全面玻璃材质设计、锁屏时间可以自由调整大小、 通知采用iOS样式的底部堆叠、桌面小部件支持堆叠、 桌面文件夹支持自定义尺寸规格 等等 另外在超级小爱的AI方面， 新增了超级小爱专家模式，并有顶部胶囊状态的菜单展示状态 此外，之前内测的小米自研输入法也将正式上线 另外根据流出的信息 超级岛仍然没有平滑圆角、玻璃效果只支持8E以上天玑9500以上（包括O1） 泄漏图像源：MIUI社区、微博（原帖已被删除） 微博额外信息来源 引导页原始HTML文件
🙈1
隐私提示: 使用 Clash Mi 时 注意这个开关 默认开启, 订阅将发往 Clash Mi 的 API(狗狗加速) 🔗 申必群友的 Clash Mi-备用下载通道安全分析 🧐 合集 💬 群组 😄 恰饭 🥰联系推广 🥰 #ClashMi #客户端 #隐私
看完蜘蛛侠，我感觉是20分钟的主旨硬是为粉丝做成了145分钟 动作戏真不错，成家班给了超英动作戏新的活力，动作配合构图的表现力是强的 但是我感觉文戏始终进不去，导致新观众在反复的房间场景里是迷茫的，抓不住钩子 “V-MAX”其实把全片最大的悬念给直接剧透了，因为琴的背景设定来的太晚导致揭露的文戏力根本就不够，纯靠特效凑 关键是最后作为泪点的梅姨作为教诲者说几句温情话，情感过渡半分钟不到，琴·葛蕾就感动到解除多数人类的控制，危机解除 唯一的亮点是在结尾，在讲完琴之后到蜘蛛侠治愈后的欢迎程度，这种恶与坏的对比所呈现出来的孤独感才是我感受到的全片重点 远不如口碑很差狗血拉满的那部神奇女侠1984
❤1👍1
😁😁😁😁😁
😁4❤2
谷歌如何破坏了 RSS 订阅的普及 (2023) 原文：https://openrss.org/blog/how-google-helped-destroy-adoption-of-rss-feeds 阅读时间：4 分钟 分数：157
三星解锁节也是吃上了，S23/S24/S25越狱后 可以不熔断Knox获得KernelSU 刚好最近把旧的米11青春版换成了三星S24 因为这是符合我要的 "<170g" "小屏" "侧面/超声波指纹" "性能不差" 选择三星时，本就想懒得Root，因为熔断的代价很大 说实话，真正拿到越狱Root之后，我反而开始思考： 手机是变得更自由了，但人不一定更自由 要背负"隐藏应用列表" "TEE修复" "隐藏SELinux里的Root痕迹" "关闭LSP日志隐藏痕迹" 的话 Root 省下的时间，真的能覆盖维护 Root 的成本吗？ 除了我作为双持刚需的平板登录 "屏蔽开屏广告" "会员"这些看起来都能用不侵入式的辅助功能+代理的HTTPS解密搞定 真正不可替代的，可能也只剩下一些系统级改动： "删掉不能关闭的系统广告" "完整备份应用数据" "改调度删云控" 以及"打开厂商刻意独家的机型功能" 我感觉从软件漏洞层拿Root…
🥰8❤4👍1😁1
好了，现在新的这一块Watch s10除了又开始掉漆之外 心电图也开始坏了，又回到当年经历过的通病 得双指用力握才能度数，还得保持稳定力度 不然能徒手控制心跳幅度。
Posted without readable text
K3本质上还是个闭源模型，所谓开源主要是一种营销手段。 虽然我这两天吐槽了A\和OpenAI等一堆商业公司，但是现在很多人对开源模型有奇怪的期待，也是时候该泼下冷水了。开源并不能省钱，你算出来便宜只是在白嫖别人的训练成本，长期看这个钱你还是得以某种形式付出去。 当然我100%支持模型厂商收钱。 https://x.com/cherylnatsu/status/2081996644476965119
本频道读者通过私下管道向我们投稿了一段发生在某洗稿频道的群组对话，为保护当事人隐私，所有用户名均已打码。 截图中参与讨论的一方为洗稿频道的管理者，另一方并非受害频道的管理者。 该媒体在先前的声明中把自己的行为定性为「互联网内容广泛传播」，同时把公开指责定性为「未沟通、未核实」的非理性行为，并预设了「先私信联系」才算正当的维权路径。这套表述方式把自己重新 Framing 成了一个受害者。 同时，在投稿群内，涉事频道管理员却寻求一个中间人出面施压或斡旋，拒绝反思自己的稿件管理流程问题。当对方拒绝配合、让管理员自己去处理，管理员的反应是「不想改变」「和我无关」，摆出了一副完全拒绝处理问题的嘴脸。 这体现出来了一种极致的双标。声明里说欢迎沟通、理性核实，但在私下场合，却展现出了截然不同的丑陋姿态：试图调动私人关系转移压力，被识破后直接封禁对方。 这是一种极端自利的叙事，假装一副开放沟通的样子，实际上沟通的结果必须对自己有利，沟…
在星巴克喝着TRAE送的免费美式，用着德国SEPA的Claude Max20x，手机上遥控着家里玻利维亚区85块一个月的GPT Plus 仿佛回到了那个外卖大战的夏天
AI 时代的我，过得像个农民。 每天睡觉之前，我要种一点东西。打开电脑，看看手头有什么，或许是几篇资料，一段录音，一些没写完的程序，一堆还没整理的图片。分一分，筛一筛，挑出来些好的想法，种到智能体里面去。 和稻谷一样，种下去发芽也是需要时间的。任务布置完，电脑屏幕亮起，屏幕上的终端时不时跳一下，没什么好看的。智能体的图标一闪一闪，说它在思考。AI 在想，我也不知道它在想什么，就像我也不知道稻子发芽前在想什么一样。 想也没有用，该长会长。我便去烧水、洗澡，一会儿关灯睡觉了。 第二天早上起来，去看看收成。 有时很好，资料分门别类地整理好了，文件名也改过了，录音被转录成文字，细细地按说话人和主题切成臊子，程序打包好了，还留了一份说明。 有时不太好。出去找资料的智能体找回了一堆 AI slop 的玩意儿，还在输出里犟嘴，写东西的智能体写到一半发疯，把要保留的东西删掉了，还给你附上一封离职证明。 能咋办，坐下来，冲杯茶，一份…
Showing the 12 most recent of 14 posts we hold for @ijustseesee. 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 16 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“蛋挞观察室” (@ijustseesee), 2,855 subscribers as measured 16 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ijustseesee.
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.