Channel
@aiformanagers
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
113subscribers
-2 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001893401906 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @aiformanagers |
| Created | Between 1 October 2022 and 30 September 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 9 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 5 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 5 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/aiformanagers |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 5 Sept 2026, 03:01 | 113 | +1 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 17:23 | 112 | -2 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 16:23 | 114 | -1 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 05:32 | 115 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 22:04 | 115 | first reading |
16 posts held, back to 14 August 2024 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page 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 16 posts for this entry, the most recent from 10 March 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.
76 reactions across 14 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 40.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 31 | 40.8% | |
| 🔥 | 22 | 28.9% | |
| 👍 | 14 | 18.4% | |
| 💯 | 4 | 5.26% | |
| ✍ | 3 | 3.95% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 1.32% | |
| 😁 | 1 | 1.32% |
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 14 of the 16 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 76 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 16 most recent posts we hold, published 14 August 2024 to 10 March 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.
Любопытный вопрос возник: Что для вас хороший, качественный промпт? Какие элементы в нём обязательны, чтобы AI сразу выдал полноценный ответ, а не приходилось уточнять ещё пять раз? Мне кажется, вот этот промпт дал мне очень быстрый и развернутый результат. Но вдруг я что-то упускаю и его можно сделать ещё лучше? Поделитесь, пожалуйста, своими принципами.
❤4
Photo, posted without a caption
🔥2
Я на втором уровне. И редко, только когда что-то действительно важно, на третьем @aiformanagers
👍5
Коллеги из инвестиционной организации в Нидерландах подготовили полезный буклет «The Value of Product Mindset in Deep Tech». Он будет интересен всем, кто работает с инновациями или выводит технологии на рынок. Всего 18 страниц концентрированных знаний и опыта.
❤7👍1
Ян Лекун, один из основателей ИИ, заявил: LLM — тупиковый путь к настоящему разуму. 😱 Почему: Модели учатся на сотнях тысяч лет текста Ребёнок учится быстрее через зрение Мир сложнее, чем язык Решение — World Models, такие как JEPA: ИИ, который учится, наблюдая, а не читая. V-JEPA уже понимает физику из 16 кадров видео — без подсказок. Это не чатботы, это ИИ, понимающий реальность. Если вы ставите всё на LLM …
🔥3❤1
Увидела вот такое простое объяснение и кайфанула! Забирайте тоже себе: Запутались в ML, NLP, генеративных и других моделях ИИ? Вот краткий обзор 6 самых важных типов моделей ИИ, которые нужно понимать в 2025 году 👇 1) Модели машинного обучения (ML) Обучаются на размеченных и неразмеченных данных для классификации, предсказаний и выявления закономерностей. Примеры: деревья решений, SVM, XGBoost. 2) Модели глубоког…
❤2👍1
Кажется у Фотошопа проблемы Gemini Flash творит ______________ Посты по теме: - создавать презентации
perplexity.ai тут выдали новость что: Теперь DeepSeek R1 доступен на всех платформах Perplexity! Включайте Pro Search с R1 на вебе, мобильных устройствах или MacOS и тестируйте передовой ИИ без цензуры. ✅ Без ограничений – задавайте любые вопросы, даже те, которые недоступны в DeepSeek ✅ Защита данных – серверы в США и Европе, информация не передаётся провайдеру модели ✅ Доступность – 500 запросов в день для Pro-по…
❤1🔥1
🔥 сравниваем ТОП-5 ИИ-АССИСТЕНТОВ ✅ ChatGPT (OpenAI) 🔹 Сильные стороны: Генерирует тексты, помогает с идеями, анализирует информацию. Хорошо понимает контекст. 🔹 Минусы: Может ошибаться, не всегда дает актуальные данные. 🔹 Лучше всего подходит для: Брейншторминга, написания текстов, ответов на вопросы. ✅ Google Gemini (ex-Bard) 🔹 Сильные стороны: Интеграция с Google-сервисами, быстрый поиск информации. 🔹 Минусы: Ин…
❤3🔥2👍1
Photo, posted without a caption
💯4❤1😁1
Это бот?
Shares as published, totalling 0%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Кейс: У меня на втором канале под постом оставили вот такой комментарий. Внимание вопрос: Это бот? Если да, то по каким признакам его можно вычислить? Мог ли быть задействован ИИ для его создания и что в этом случае ИИ помогает делать? Своими мыслями по этому вопросу поделюсь позже
❤1👍1
Showing the 12 most recent of 16 posts we hold for @aiformanagers. 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 poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Это бот?
Shares as published, totalling 0%. 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 16 most recent posts we hold, published 14 August 2024 to 10 March 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.
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 5 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“ИИ для управленцев” (@aiformanagers), 113 subscribers as measured 5 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/aiformanagers.
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.