This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
3 measurements spanning 3 days, net -2. 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 2,810–2,812 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
8 Aug 2026, 21:20
2,810
-2
6 Aug 2026, 06:32
2,812
no change
6 Aug 2026, 05:21
2,812
first reading
Engagement
21 posts held, back to 12 March 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 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
138.3%
avg views ÷ 2,810 subscribers
Avg views / post
3,890
4 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.096%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
4
of 21 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 3 of 4 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026
Posts held
21 (12 March 2026 – 6 August 2026)
Views total
15,550
Reactions total
11
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 16:08 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.
Reaction mix
29 reactions across 9 posts, in 1 kind.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🎄
29
100.0%
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 9 of the 21 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 29reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 12 March 2026 to 6 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
4
across the posts below
Posts paid on
4
of 21 we hold a reading for · 19%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @evocoders. 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 21 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 12 March 2026 to 6 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.
⚡️ Запись воркшопа "INITE Architecture: от AI-продуктов к субъектной операционной системе" уже доступна клубчанам!
На воркшопе разбираем Как INITE собирает agents, MCP/skills, Temporal, SurrealDB, Dify/n8n, вертикальные продукты и business interfaces в единую экосистему. Что уже готово, что in progress и куда всё это растёт. Спикер — Михаил Савченко, СЕО inite.ai.
ЧТО ВНУТРИ
- Эволюция SaaS: от классической архитек…
📰 ТОП-4 новости ИИ в программировании из 71-го дайджеста клуба Эволюция Кода
🔸 Anthropic представила Claude Opus 5 и Claude Sonnet 5
Opus 5 почти догоняет Fable 5 в CursorBench 3.2, но обходится примерно вдвое дешевле за выполненную задачу. Цена осталась на уровне Opus 4.8 — $5/$25 за миллион токенов. Sonnet 5 приблизился по возможностям к Opus 4.8, став заметно более доступной моделью для программирования и агентны…
🔥 Обновил сразу три больших курса по ИИ-разработке — больше 30 крупных изменений.
Если вы работаете с ИИ, то знаете главную проблему: информация устаревает быстрее, чем успеваешь её изучить. Модели сменяют друг друга, появляются новые протоколы и инструменты, а вчерашние рекомендации уже сегодня могут быть бесполезны.
Поэтому я снова перелопатил Базу Знаний «Эволюции Кода»: актуализировал материалы, добавил новые г…
📞 Запись клубного созвона №37 / 14 июля 2026
ЧТО ВНУТРИ
- ИИ-вакансия для SE, который/ая будет работать в паре с Dark Factory
- Разгребание легаси и AI-инженерия
- Fable 5 vs Soul: первые впечатления
- Бенчмарки, кернелы и работа моделей
- Концепция Dark Factory и оркестрация агентов
- Безопасность и работа агентов на локальных машинах
- Итоги сравнения Soul и Fable
- Рекомендации по VPS и облакам для разработки
- …
⚡️ INITE Brain: память, время и границы для AI-агентов
На воркшопе разбираем bitemporal facts, lifecycle, locale-pinning, retract/forget, decision log, provenance, scopes. Поговорим о том, почему «память агента» — это не RAG, а полноценная когнитивная инфраструктура.. Спикер — Михаил Савченко, СЕО inite.ai.
ЧТО ВНУТРИ
- Зачем седлать новые архитектуры памяти
- Вторая жизнь Obsidian и Markdown-файлов
- Почему вопрос…
📞 Запись клубного созвона №36 / 10 мая 2026
ЧТО ВНУТРИ
- Fable 5 от Anthropic: первые впечатления и бенчмарки
- Цены на Fable 5 и отключение headless-режима (-p) в Claude
- Сейфгарды, Red Team и тестирование уязвимостей в контролируемом окружении
- Глубина ответов Fable 5, разбор сетевых протоколов и генерация диаграмм
- Создание сложных презентаций через Claude Desktop
- Как оркестровать агентов через подписки и по…
⚡️ Temporal как позвоночник мультиагентных систем
Разбираем, почему agents без durable orchestration превращаются в хаос, чем Temporal сильнее очередей, почему RabbitMQ это транспорт, а не архитектура процессов, и как строить long-running workflows для AI-систем. Спикер — Михаил Савченко, СЕО inite.ai.
ЧТО ВНУТРИ
- Разница между MVP на вайб-кодинге и реальным продакшеном
- Ограничения No-Code платформ (n8n, Dify) и…
🔥 Митап с co-creator Gonka Protocol Глебом Моргачёвым доступен в паблике: https://youtu.be/Qh0N3MnXmSU
Глеб — один из создателей Gonka наряду с братьями Либерманами и другими участниками команды. Gonka — это децентрализованный блокчейн-протокол, задача которого — предоставлять пользователям децентрализованный инференс открытых моделей и потеснить монополистов-гиперскейлеров вроде OpenAI, Anthropic и других.
В этом …
В «Эволюции Кода» стартует мини-серия из трёх воркшопов с Мишей Савченко — CEO INITE и нашим частым спикером.
Будем разбирать не просто «как сделать агента на коленке», а нормальную инженерную архитектуру для AI-систем: durable orchestration, память, время, границы, long-running workflows, provenance, Temporal, MCP/skills, SurrealDB, Dify/n8n и всё то, без чего мультиагентные системы быстро превращаются в весёлый, н…
📰 ТОП-4 новости ИИ в программировании из 70го дайджеста клуба Эволюция Кода
🔸 Google представила новый флагман — Gemini 3.5 Flash
Несмотря на название, это уже не тот Flash, что был в линейке Gemini 3: модель позиционируется как новый флагман и обходит Gemini 3.1 Pro. При этом заявлена скорость до 300 токенов/с и сильные результаты на SWE-bench Pro (55,1%) и Terminal-Bench 2.1 (76,2%). Gemini 3.5 Pro обещают выпусти…
📞 Запись клубного созвона №35 / 19 мая 2026
ЧТО ВНУТРИ
- Обзор новой модели Cursor Composer 2.5
- Лидеры в разработке: GPT-5.5 против Claude Opus
- «Белые списки» IP-адресов в регионах и кодинг с Алисой от Яндекса
- Использование Claude Agent SDK для автоматизации рутины
- Проект G-Brain: векторные базы знаний на MD-файлах
- Огромные траты на ИИ: $1.3 млн в месяц на 100 кодинг-агентов
- Кейс: найм Head of AI в товар…
Обновился лендинг клуба: https://evocoders.ai
Теперь там стало гораздо больше полезной информации — можно лучше понять, подходит ли вам клуб и стоит ли в него вступать 😉
Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @evocoders. 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.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 21,769 of 1,169,250entries 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
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
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.
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 8 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Эволюция Кода / Анонсы” (@evocoders), 2,810 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/evocoders.
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.