Взял вторую почту и оплатил той же картой, посмотрим надолго ли хватит) За пару часов без Claude, я понял, насколько я стал беспомощным
👏7🔥2🗿2👍1

Channel
@iisy_business
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
2,111subscribers
-2 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1002389790230 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @iisy_business |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 17 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 17 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/iisy_business |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 17 Aug 2026, 18:55 | 2,111 | -2 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 21:56 | 2,113 | +1 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 09:04 | 2,112 | -1 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 10:58 | 2,113 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 11:31 | 2,113 | first reading |
19 posts held, back to 16 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 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 28 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 19 (16 March 2026 – 28 July 2026) |
| Views total | 1,534 |
| Reactions total | 25 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 17:35 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.
315 reactions across 19 posts, in 19 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 34.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 107 | 34.0% | |
| 👍 | 66 | 21.0% | |
| 🔥 | 64 | 20.3% | |
| 😁 | 18 | 5.71% | |
| 🤯 | 14 | 4.44% | |
| 👏 | 11 | 3.49% | |
| 😢 | 8 | 2.54% | |
| 😱 | 7 | 2.22% | |
| 🎉 | 4 | 1.27% | |
| 🖕 | 3 | 0.952% | |
| 😨 | 3 | 0.952% | |
| 🗿 | 2 | 0.635% | |
| 🤣 | 2 | 0.635% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 0.317% | |
| 🌭 | 1 | 0.317% | |
| 💯 | 1 | 0.317% | |
| 😭 | 1 | 0.317% | |
| 🤝 | 1 | 0.317% | |
| 🤮 | 1 | 0.317% |
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 19 of the 19 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 315reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 16 March 2026 to 28 July 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @iisy_business. 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 19 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 16 March 2026 to 28 July 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.
Взял вторую почту и оплатил той же картой, посмотрим надолго ли хватит) За пару часов без Claude, я понял, насколько я стал беспомощным
👏7🔥2🗿2👍1
Мне забанили аккаунт Claude Принимайте в клуб) Подал заявку на разбан, так как забанили не меня, а мою девушку(мы моей картой платим подписку). Посмотрим что будет. Но, учитывая что моему аккаунту хуй знает сколько + видно что я не китайская лаборатория, я думаю разбанят
🤯5😱4👍2😢2
Я был прав. Fable 5 остается в подписке, Anthropic устали продлевать доступ и оставили ее в Max тарифе(как и было 50 процентов недельного лимита). И это отличная новость! После Fable, Opus вообще не тянет. Качество несопоставимое, особенно на сложных задачах и дизайне Всех с хорошей новостью! P.s. для Pro план fable останется только за бабки(usage credits), сейчас хорошая возможность перейти на Max тариф
❤5🔥3👍2🖕2
OpenAI прекратит поддержку ИИ браузера Atlas А я говорил что это хуйня! А вы меня не слушали) Ну, а если без шуток, то тоже хуйня)) Кому нужны браузеры под управлением ИИ? Как выяснилось - никому. Ну, предсказуемо. Зачем использовать отдельную абстракцию, когда: А) есть всем привычных хром(хз чем он всем так нравится, но люди его почти боготворят) Б) есть Codex/Cowork, который может управлять твоим браузером, для эт…
👍2🤣2👏1🖕1🤯1😁1😭1
Матушка конкуренция) Спасибо OpenAI за Релиз ChatGPT 5.6 Sol, судя по всему, это либо Fable5, либо лучше(обязательно постараюсь потестировать), но самое главное, что они теперь борются за внимание и дают мощнейшие модели по подписке и постоянно сбрасывают лимиты(и Anthropic и OpenAI) Как вы поняли, Fable 5 продлена до 19го числа(есть легкое наитие, что ее уже не уберут из подписки). Бегом пилить продукты!
🔥6👍3❤1
Как я побывал на MotoGP Не так давно ездил поддерживать своего партнера по alfaci.xyz и автора канала @getrichortech Дениса Литвинова (зацените футболку)на гонках SuperBike, было невероятно захватывающе и интересно(по моему довольному лицу по-моему видно). И решил в этом посте рассказать, а как вообще появился идея проекта Мы оба ненавидим дизайнеров. Мы оба не понимаем, на кой хер платить дизайнеру 50-100к(это оче…
❤27
Срочная новость! Fable 5 продлили до 12го числа! Срочно бежим разрабатывать новые продукты и рефакторить старые
🔥7👍5❤3
Я был неправ, Fable 5 - монстр То, что я воспринял как минусы у этой модели, внезапно оказалось плюсами 1) излишне ебет голову на простых задачах. Это 100%, но, просто не надо давать ей простые задачи)) Попробовал с созданием нового продукта(расскажу позже в канале), работает отлично. Fable5 тупо меньше косячит, уже скучаю по этой модели 2)Интерфейс. Мое почтение, Fable5 делает реально приятный глазу интерфейс при 0…
👍4🔥4❤2😁2⚡1
Fable 5 вернулся! Как удачно, что не писал посты на эту тему(ну объективно вы везде прочитали что США их блокнули), хоть тут повезло что был очень занят(ребятки, сори что не успеваю писать посты чаще, в продукте погряз) Ну, что сказать, какой-то мега разницы с Opus я не заметил, но в UI/UX значительно лучше(тут прогресс на лицо). Но как будто много лишнего делает, что мне часто не нравится, приходиться вычищать пла…
❤5🔥4👍1
Notion удалил поддержку Claude моделей Не только я заметил деградацию моделей в последнем релизе Claude Opus, поэтому даже ноушен временно удалил их из выбора. Про 4.7 несогласен, считаю ее лучшей моделью(которой сам до сих пор пользуюсь вместо 4.8) для разработки, но, она очень чувствительна к инструкциям и правильно оформленной документации и запросам. Поэтому неудивительно что большей части пользователей она не…
👍5❤3😁3🌭1
Мое честное мнение об Opus 4.8 Это полная хуйня, буду возвращаться на 4.7 Можно почитать тред на эту тему
🤯6👍4😁4😨3💯1🤝1
Вышел Claude Opus 4.8 Не буду долго размусоливать, судя по бенчмаркам, все стало лучше(а когда было иначе). Но, я бы пока отнесся с скепсисом, так как на Reddit пишут, что модель по поведению больше похожа на 4.6(кстати эта модель много кому нравилась больше, на мой взгляд, зря) Пойду тестить, надеюсь не придется даунгрейдить Claude Code Кто уже попробовал? Что скажете
❤5👍2🔥2
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @iisy_business. 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 — 1,053,332 of 1,481,306entries 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.
Named by 1 registered channel — 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.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
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 17 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“ИИзи Бизнес” (@iisy_business), 2,111 subscribers as measured 17 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/iisy_business.
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.