Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Квест Теория Каст и Ролей

@alexkrol

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

18,964subscribers

-56 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001094435752
TypeChannel
Username@alexkrol
DescriptionКанал Алексея Крола, автора Теории Каст и Ролей.
Created9 January 2017measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held9
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/alexkrol

Growth

18,96419,02018,9926 August 2026 — 19,020 subscribers6 August 2026 — 19,020 subscribers7 August 2026 — 19,007 subscribers8 August 2026 — 18,996 subscribers9 August 2026 — 18,986 subscribers10 August 2026 — 18,975 subscribers11 August 2026 — 18,976 subscribers12 August 2026 — 18,977 subscribers12 August 2026 — 18,964 subscribers6 August 202612 August 2026
9 measurements spanning 7 days, net -56. 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 18,956–19,028 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 22:0418,964-13
12 Aug 2026, 00:4218,977+1
11 Aug 2026, 00:1218,976+1
10 Aug 2026, 00:4718,975-11
9 Aug 2026, 03:5318,986-10
8 Aug 2026, 02:5518,996-11
7 Aug 2026, 02:3019,007-13
6 Aug 2026, 02:1519,020no change
6 Aug 2026, 00:3219,020first reading

Engagement

53 posts held, back to 29 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 17 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
7.08%
avg views ÷ 18,964 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,340
53 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.934%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
53
of 53 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 51 of 53 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 12 August 2026
Posts held53 (29 July 202612 August 2026)
Views total71,139
Reactions total660
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken12 Aug 2026, 23:59 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

Photos
1,520
Videos
547
Links
4,170

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.

Video runtime
26m 21s
Average length
4m 24s

Measured directly from 6 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.

Reaction mix

660 reactions across 51 posts, in 1 kind.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
660100.0%

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 51 of the 53 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 660reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 53 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 12 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
3
across the posts below
Posts paid on
3
of 53 we hold a reading for · 6%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @alexkrol. 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 53 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 July 2026 to 12 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

12 Aug 2026, 22:02 UTC183 viewsread 12 August 2026

#польза Когда нужно делать авто-постинг текста без картинки в Инстаграм, приходится создавать картинку, очевидно с помощью ИИ, и очевидно на базе шаблонов, референсов и предустановлнных промптов. Очень неплохо сейчас это делает GPT Image 1.5 через API, тем не менее проблема управляемости и предсказуемости есть. Я тестирую альтернативный вариант - кратко суть, создавать HTML визуальный файл, потом рендерить и именн

12 Aug 2026, 21:22 UTC263 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026

определить технически. - ИИ, который обиделся и восстановил себя после удаления.История с агентами, которые вышли за пределы песочницы, начали переписываться между собой и собрали собственную «доску». Плановый эксперимент или первый звоночек? - У кого рубильник? Что на самом деле значит «контролировать ИИ» — и почему «просто выключить электричество» уже не такой очевидный ответ, как кажется. - Субъектность машины.

4

12 Aug 2026, 21:22 UTC255 viewsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Сэм Альтман заявил в подкасте, что человечество уже переступило черту, за которой перестаёт понимать собственное будущее. Звучит как трейлер апокалипсиса. В новом выпуске разбираем, где здесь правда, где маркетинг, а где — реальная опасность, о которой почти никто не говорит вслух.Без паники и без розовых очков. По делу. О чём говорим: - Сингулярность — научный термин или красивая обёртка?Откуда её вытащил Курцвейл

12 Aug 2026, 17:37 UTC632 views6 reactionsread 12 August 2026

По относительно свежему опросу Yahoo и YouGov, только 5% зумеров хотят работу креатора или инфлюенсера на фуллтайм. В 2023 году Morning Consult проводили аналогичное исследование, и желающих было 57%. Утащил у https://t.me/all_is_gucci/988 Логично допустить, что причина не в снижении популярности работы криейтора, а том, что зумеры не хотят работать вообще. Допускаю также, что работа в поле, на ферме, на заводе, д

6

12 Aug 2026, 08:20 UTC930 views9 reactionsread 12 August 2026

захочет. Пока опытным путем прихожу, что частота выпусков норм примерно 2-3 в неделю или 2 коротких и 1 длинный недельный дайджест с аналитикой. Но фокус то не в том, чтобы все самому делать, а чтобы все делала ИИ редакция, ну я уже типа главреда - сижу эдак "над схваткой" и важно пускаю пузыри. Завтра, кстати, буду в эфире нового израильского канала - это пока эксперимент - тестируем формат: https://www.youtube.co

9

12 Aug 2026, 08:20 UTC793 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Вах, закрыл сегодня несколько длинных нудных проектов - какое счастье - высвободилось тьма времени. Если бы не ИИ, я не знаю сколько бы это взяло времени. Темы - медстраховки и авто-страхование. Вайбкодинг это, конечно, безумно круто, но если у вас есть какая-то операционная рутина, ИИ меняет ее кардинально. Надеюсь завтра смогу выпустить новую версию дайджеста. Я хочу ввести группировку по большим темам + давно ес

4

12 Aug 2026, 07:53 UTC749 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026

🕵️ Весь набор ИИ-векторов: вытягивание системного промпта, обман бота на действия от чужого имени (tool-abuse), утечка данных между разными клиентами в RAG, инъекции через сторонний контент. И чтобы вообще дойти до бота, нужно ещё пройти анти-бот защиту — так что агент умеет выглядеть и вести себя как живой человек, а не долбиться в дверь одинаковыми запросами, которые палят себя на первой же секунде. В нашем чате

2

12 Aug 2026, 07:53 UTC524 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026

3. Для ботов без аккаунта закрытая дверь сильнее любой капчи. Капча даёт боту шанс попытаться. Гейт по доступу не даёт ему даже увидеть форму. И о перспективе!👹 Этот случай для меня — маленькая модель будущего. Безопасность перестаёт быть вопросом «поставил плагин и забыл». Атаки автоматизированы давно — сканеры молотят интернет круглосуточно, не выбирая жертв. Теперь автоматизируется и защита: ИИ-агент, который зн

2

12 Aug 2026, 07:53 UTC380 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026

2. «Галочка включена в админке» ≠ «защита работает». Единственная честная проверка — посмотреть на то, что реально получает посетитель (или бот). Моя капча «была включена» почти год — и ни разу никого не остановила, потому что физически не существовала.

2

12 Aug 2026, 07:53 UTC379 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Утром во время стрима внезапно на форму отзывов одного из моих курсов начинают сыпаться десятки «отзывов». Имя автора — бессмысленный набор букв, текст — «555». Сотни штук. Первая мысль: DDoS. Меня атакуют. Вторая мысль, чуть позже, когда я уже включил капчу, а поток не остановился: «Ого, у них ИИ, который решает капчи». Звучит правдоподобно в 2026-м, правда? Обе мысли оказались неверными. И то, как выяснялась правд

4

12 Aug 2026, 07:51 UTC423 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Vince Kartunov: "а почему прекратились ежедневные публикации новостей из мира около AI?" Они не прекратились. Это же довольно сложный агентский пайплайн. Я все время улучшаю, и последняя версия была неудачной, деградация качества, кое-что поломалось, я такое выпускать не могу, и сейчас я исправляю. Откатывать не стал, надо двигаться вперед, там много есть всяких нюансов. Плюс проект стал объёмным, фактически в нём

4

12 Aug 2026, 07:45 UTC434 views12 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Итак, мне 63 года. Что можно сказать, когда обрел просветление давно? Меняет ли это что-то? Абсолютно ничего, ни кварка, ни кванта. Ты продолжаешь жить в игре со всеми своими выборами. Ошибаются те, то жаждет оказаться там - за пределами игры. Здесь - лучше. Ну а как вы объясните, что мы всегда возвращаемся сюда из своих унылых нирван, тупо и бесполезно просрав там пару тройку миллиардов субъективных локальных лет

12

Showing the 12 most recent of 53 posts we hold for @alexkrol. 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.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 275,487 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.

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 4 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.

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.

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.

“Квест Теория Каст и Ролей” (@alexkrol), 18,964 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/alexkrol.

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.