Photo, posted without a caption
❤2😁2🔥1

Channel
@explain_law_news
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
116subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 18 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003826421448 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @explain_law_news |
| Description | Строим ExplainLaw — AI для юристов и legal-команд. Пишем про: — legaltech и AI — судебную практику и workflow юристов — как создаем стартап — ошибки, инсайты и рост продукта Для связи: https://t.me/explain_info Сайт: https://explainlaw.ru |
| Created | Between 1 February 2026 and 30 June 2026— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 18 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 18 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/explain_law_news |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 18 Aug 2026, 08:45 | 116 | no change |
| 18 Aug 2026, 08:30 | 116 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 1 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 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 18 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (1 July 2026 – 18 August 2026) |
| Views total | 2,226 |
| Reactions total | 71 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 18 Aug 2026, 08:45 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 18 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
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.
151 reactions across 20 posts, in 11 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 47.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 72 | 47.7% | |
| 🔥 | 44 | 29.1% | |
| 😁 | 9 | 5.96% | |
| 🤣 | 6 | 3.97% | |
| 🤔 | 5 | 3.31% | |
| 💩 | 3 | 1.99% | |
| 🤡 | 3 | 1.99% | |
| 🤩 | 3 | 1.99% | |
| ❤🔥 | 2 | 1.32% | |
| 🏆 | 2 | 1.32% | |
| 👍 | 2 | 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 20 of the 20 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 151reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 1 July 2026 to 18 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.
Photo, posted without a caption
❤2😁2🔥1
Промпт-инъекции в суде На прошлой неделе завирусилась новость, про то как американец попытался "взломать" ИИ через судебные документы. Удобно, когда твои посты так хорошо накладываются на новостную повестку. Недавно писали про промпт-инъекции и безопасность, подробнее почитать можно тут: https://t.me/explain_law_news/61 и тут: https://t.me/explain_law_news/62 Мы решили не торопиться с выпуском новости и разобратьс…
❤3
Привет! Когда пользователи тестируют ExplainLaw, то иногда жалуются, что агент выдумывает судебную практику. Присылают нам выдуманные номера дел. Иногда действительно бот сбоит и выдумывает, но так бывает не всегда Мы собрали подборку дел, которые выглядят как галлюцинация ИИ, но существуют на самом деле. 1️⃣ А40-12345/2025 АС Москвы. Ространснадзор просит привлечь «Трансстроймеханизацию» к ответственности по ч. 3 …
😁5
ExplainLaw и ТГУ: два года совместного тестирования Второй год подряд студенты Томского государственного университета вместе с юридической клиникой проверяют качество нашего ИИ. Схема простая: берут реальное дело, по которому уже есть заключение живого юриста, прогоняют его через ExplainLaw и сравнивают пункт за пунктом. За два года - 120 дел. В статье рассказываем: - что получает от такого тестирования стартап - …
❤6🔥1
актуально с 2023
🤡3😁2🔥1
Всем привет! Написали вторую статью из серии про безопасность. В этот раз про ИИ-агентов. Рассмотрели что бывает, когда нейросети выдают не только слова, но и руки: доступ к почте, файлам, базам, браузеру и т.д. Внутри: предприниматель, чью базу удалили вопреки запрету. Продакт-менеджер, попросивший разложить файлы по папкам и оставшийся без файлов. Письмо, которое никто не открывал, но которое утащило внутренние д…
🔥4❤2
Всем привет! Написали большой разбор про безопасность при работе с ИИ. Без паники и без "нейросети украдут ваши данные", зато с реальными кейсами и последствиями. Внутри: три инженера Samsung, которые за двадцать дней устроили компании запрет генеративного ИИ. Финансист, потерявший 25 миллионов долларов на видеозвонке, где все участники были сгенерированы. ИИ-агент, снёсший боевую базу вопреки прямому запрету. И по…
🔥4❤3
Уволили из-за DeepSeek Сегодня подушним и покопаемся в пошумевшем кейсе. Лор ситуации, если кому-то не попадалось. Компания уволила менеджера за нарушение режима коммерческой тайны. Поскольку сотрудница использовала дипсик, в СМИ новость завирусилась как "Московского топ-менеджера с зарплатой 800 тысяч рублей в месяц уволили из-за DeepSeek". Конечно, триггер - это хорошая зарплата и ИИ. Но нам стало интересно, и м…
❤4🔥2
Что такое юридический workflow и почему это больше, чем просто ИИ? Юридический workflow – это последовательность действий, через которую проходит конкретная задача: сбор документов, проверки, согласования, принятие решения, фиксация результата и контроль сроков. Возьмём антикоррупционную проверку контрагента. Статья 13.3 Федерального закона № 273-ФЗ обязывает организации разрабатывать и принимать меры по предупрежд…
❤3🏆2🔥1
Photo, posted without a caption
❤3💩3🤩3🤣2
Сегодня в посте не рассказываем ничего нового А предаёмся неге рассуждений. Хотелось бы сказать, что рассуждения пространны, но нет, они весьма прикладные и прикладываются к legal tech. Да и к любому tech в целом. Способен ли продукт стать крупным и заметным игроком на рынке без собственных ключевых технологий? Ну, например. Много кто создаёт свои продукты, которые являются обвязкой над сторонними LLM-моделями, и,…
❤5🤔4
Скоро новая функция в ExplainLAW
🔥6❤1🤔1
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @explain_law_news. 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 — 1,020,699 of 1,549,704entries 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.
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.
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 18 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“ExplainLaw News” (@explain_law_news), 116 subscribers as measured 18 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/explain_law_news.
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.