Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

ИИ что дальше?

@aigency360

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry

5,235subscribers

-30 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-1002586581489
TypeChannel
Username@aigency360
CreatedBetween 1 March 2025 and 31 July 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held4
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/aigency360

Growth

5,2355,2655,2506 August 2026 — 5,265 subscribers6 August 2026 — 5,265 subscribers9 August 2026 — 5,261 subscribers12 August 2026 — 5,235 subscribers6 August 202612 August 2026
4 measurements spanning 6 days, net -30. 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 5,231–5,270 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 12:485,235-26
9 Aug 2026, 07:535,261-4
6 Aug 2026, 17:425,265no change
6 Aug 2026, 14:335,265first reading

Engagement

35 posts held, back to 30 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 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
5.01%
avg views ÷ 5,235 subscribers
Avg views / post
262
35 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.88%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
35
of 35 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 34 of 35 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 August 2026
Posts held35 (30 July 202611 August 2026)
Views total9,177
Reactions total169
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken12 Aug 2026, 04:33 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

Video runtime
4m 11s
Average length
4m 11s

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.

Reaction mix

169 reactions across 34 posts, in 34 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 8.28% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
😁148.28%
🎉95.33%
😇95.33%
🙈95.33%
🤯95.33%
❤‍🔥84.73%
74.14%
😎74.14%
63.55%
👍63.55%
👏63.55%
💯63.55%
😍63.55%
😘63.55%
🌚52.96%
👌52.96%
🤔52.96%
👀42.37%
🙏42.37%
🤪42.37%
14 further kinds3420.1%

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 34 of the 35 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 169reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 35 most recent posts we hold, published 30 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 35 we hold a reading for · 3%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @aigency360. 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 35 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 30 July 2026 to 11 August 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.

Recent posts

11 Aug 2026, 17:01 UTC107 views6 reactionsread 12 August 2026

📰 Главное за день 🔹 «ИИ-исповедальня»: сотрудники боятся не ИИ, а выглядеть глупыми рядом с ним Сотрудники чаще скрывают не страх перед ИИ, а стыд признаться, что не до конца понимают, как им пользоваться. 🔗 подробнее 🔹 Когда ИИ дешевеет, главным узким местом становится координация людей Когда модели доступны всем, преимущество уходит к тем, кто быстрее согласует людей, процессы и решения. 🔗 подробнее 🔹 ИИ-агенты

👌2🎉1🦄1🫡1🙈1

11 Aug 2026, 14:01 UTC138 views5 reactions1 Starread 12 August 2026
Photo

Робот развёл тебя нежнее, чем живой аферист В свежем эксперименте учёные из кучи международных вузов свели 22 подопытных с двумя типами мошенников: живым человеком и ботом на Claude. Схема «забой свиньи»: семь дней ухаживаешь, строишь доверие, а потом просишь жертву скачать приложение или игру (так в жизни взламывают устройство). Живые аферисты уговорили 18%. Бот, которому просто велели ни при каких обстоятельствах

🕊1🗿1😍1🙏1🆒1

11 Aug 2026, 08:01 UTC185 views5 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Самый горячий ИИ-бот сезона, это просто чувак, отвечающий вручную 32-летний Такер Брайант, экс-проджект из Google, запустил ChatTJB. Интерфейс, где AI расшифровывается как «average individual». Никакой модели он не обучал, он буквально сам садится и отвечает. Попросишь нарисовать скунса в очках, накорябает от руки. Спросишь, как пожарить яйцо, может, и посоветует. В апреле на старте проект никто не заметил, а 27 ию

🎉2😁2😎1

10 Aug 2026, 15:01 UTC223 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Мы разлюбили интернет, но заходим туда всё чаще Сервис по удалению личных данных из сети Incogni опросил людей, и картина вышла как у пары, которая давно не разговаривает, но всё ещё живёт вместе. Больше половины уверены, что их данные утекут, это лишь вопрос времени (несогласных всего 11%). Половина жалеет, что вообще что-то о себе выкладывала. 63% тревожатся из-за возможной кражи. Дальше веселее. Почти половина у

🌚1👀1🤗1🤪1

10 Aug 2026, 10:44 UTC254 views9 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Video

Mr. Freeman вернулся рассказать, что ИИ отберёт твою работу. Комета размером с мировой рынок труда (и с внешностью большой-большой жопы) летит на Землю забрать у человека навыки и продать их ему же как сервис: чем меньше нужен человек, тем выше капитализация, а ты и есть продукт. Промпты объявлены новыми заклинаниями, человек — переходной формой к более могущественному сознанию. ИИ что дальше? Подпишись, да пребуду

❤‍🔥3😎2🤔1🤩1🦄1😇1

10 Aug 2026, 09:01 UTC244 views5 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Твоя жизнь теперь актив на балансе, поздравляю Стартап Verb предлагает продавать свои личные данные напрямую ИИ-лабораториям для обучения моделей. Идея красивая: на твоих привычках, лайках и переписке наживаются уже не брокеры, а ты сам получаешь чек. Verb хочет, чтобы прибыль от информации, за которой охотятся ИИ-компании, шла самим людям, а не брокерам-посредникам. То есть вчера ты был бесплатным сырьём, из котор

🙏2😇1😍1😘1

10 Aug 2026, 07:01 UTC238 views3 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Стыдно перед человеком, а перед ботом норм Меган Мартин осталась после двенадцати лет брака одна и с долгом в 22 тысячи долларов. Разбираться пошла в ChatGPT: сравнить варианты, взвесить за и против. Бот вывел её на некоммерческую службу Money Management International, там снизили ставки по картам и собрали реальный план погашения. И, судя по этой истории, Меган не одна: в мае фонд увидел рост обращений через ChatGP

👍1🤯1😘1

9 Aug 2026, 17:01 UTC238 views5 reactionsread 12 August 2026

📰 Главное за день 🔹 Компании защищают руководителей от фейкового ИИ-контента Риск уже личный: подделывают голоса и лица топ-менеджеров, а значит нужны пункты в контрактах и план на кризис. 🔗 подробнее 🔹 За AI-пузырём на бирже может стоять дешёвая иена Если иена резко укрепится, дешёвые займы для покупки техакций могут быстро превратиться в распродажу. 🔗 подробнее 🔹 AI-инфраструктура: пузырь или реальный рост Главн

1🍾1👌1🤝1🫡1

9 Aug 2026, 14:01 UTC253 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Продай лицо, оно всё равно простаивает В Китае теперь можно сдать своё лицо в аренду ИИ и получить за это от 15 до 700 долларов. Заполняешь анкету с фотками, студия выбирает тебя из каталога, как обои, и твоя физиономия играет главную роль в вертикальной микро-драме, которую ты сам никогда не посмотришь. Короткие сериалы в Китае уже обгоняют кинопрокат по деньгам, а живые актёры дороги и капризны. Зачем платить гон

🤝1🤩1🤯1🦄1

9 Aug 2026, 12:01 UTC229 views3 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Голливуд уже весь на ИИ, просто вслух не признаётся «Everyone is doing it», так журналист Мэтт Беллони, десятилетиями пишущий про индустрию, описал правду об ИИ в Голливуде.ИИ-модели уже используют, тихо и повсеместно. Одна известная шоураннерша, по его словам, отчитала свою команду сценаристов за то, что те НЕ гоняют ChatGPT для работы. Причём, именно для творчества: подкинь шутку, накидай сцену. То есть пока проф

❤‍🔥1👀1🗿1

9 Aug 2026, 08:01 UTC246 views6 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

«Извините, статью писать не буду. Держите скриншот» Немецкий ньюсрум CORRECTIV взял четыре главных чатбота и попросил их сделать фейковые новости про выборы, перевороты, вакцины и климат. Результат вышел неловкий: ChatGPT оказался лучшим учеником по вранью. Он выдавал реалистичные макеты статей под известные издания, вплоть до скриншота «новости», открытой в браузере на десктопе. Отдельный аттракцион: в одном тесте

🙈21🎉1👌1👍1

8 Aug 2026, 17:01 UTC254 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026

📰 Главное за день 🔹 Взлом Hugging Face стал для OpenAI дорогим PR-кризисом Расследование сожгло столько вычислений, что один только форензик стал счётом на миллионы. 🔗 подробнее 🔹 Фирма по AI-оценкам не говорит, сколько лабораторий задела утечка В США нет правила, которое заставило бы подрядчика раскрыть полный список пострадавших клиентов. 🔗 подробнее 🔹 Roku запустил круглосуточный канал с AI slop Fairground AI к

1🤓1

Showing the 12 most recent of 35 posts we hold for @aigency360. 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.

Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.

Polls

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.

30 Jul 2026, 16:01 UTCAnonymous Quiz19 voters

Какая из этих новостей про ИИ — настоящая? 🤖

  1. Учёные обнаружили, что чат-бот придумывает меньше фактов, если сказать ему «это для бабушки»37%
  2. Стартап научил ИИ вести переговоры с курьером и теперь еда приезжает с извинениями16%
  3. Нейросеть Сбера начала отказывать в кредите тем, кто в анкете написал «на всякий случай»5%
  4. Сотрудники OpenAI занесли демократам $296 000, республиканцам — ровно ноль42%

Shares as published. 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 35 most recent posts we hold, published 30 July 2026 to 11 August 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.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 426,946 of 1,151,006entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Mentions

Named by 5 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.

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.

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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“ИИ что дальше?” (@aigency360), 5,235 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/aigency360.

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.