Channel
@korolevsnotes
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
6,466subscribers
-6 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001416645104 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @korolevsnotes |
| Created | 5 July 2021 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/korolevsnotes |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 18:07 | 6,466 | -4 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 20:34 | 6,470 | -2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 10:10 | 6,472 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 08:16 | 6,472 | first reading |
24 posts held, back to 21 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 9 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. It is computed over the 23 of 24 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 24 (21 July 2026 – 11 August 2026) |
| Views total | 27,212 |
| Reactions total | 260 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Aug 2026, 03:07 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.
221 reactions across 20 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 32.6% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 72 | 32.6% | |
| 🔥 | 49 | 22.2% | |
| custom 5373355432800693886 | 40 | 18.1% | |
| 👍 | 28 | 12.7% | |
| 😁 | 26 | 11.8% | |
| 👎 | 6 | 2.71% |
Custom emoji. One row above is a Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The count beside it isTelegram’s.
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 23 of the 24 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 260reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 24 most recent posts we hold, published 21 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.
Как СССР чуть не изобрел интернет — и сам от него отказался Сегодня любой федеральный чиновник рано или поздно скажет что-то про «цифровую экономику», «единую систему учета» или «цифровые двойники предприятий». Звучит как будущее. На самом деле это будущее уже проектировали — в СССР, в 1962 году, и оно называлось ОГАС. В ноябре 1962-го первый заместитель председателя Совета министров Алексей Косыгин вызвал к себе а…
🔥13❤4
Posted without readable text
❤3🔥2custom 53733554328006938862
Posted without readable text
🔥3😁2custom 53733554328006938862
Posted without readable text
❤4😁2👎1custom 53733554328006938861
Posted without readable text
❤4👍3custom 53733554328006938863👎1🔥1
Posted without readable text
😁5custom 53733554328006938864❤3👎2
Posted without readable text
👎2🔥1custom 53733554328006938861
Тем временем, эксперты, российская команда при поддержке НТИ представила проект многолучевого электронного литографа для производства микросхем. Сердце установки — мультикатод, который формирует не один электронный луч, а сразу множество. Заявленный выигрыш звучит космически: экспонирование кремниевой пластины должно ужаться с полутора-двух недель до 5–7 минут — то есть примерно в 3 тыс. раз быстрее классических одн…
❤8😁3👍1custom 53733554328006938861
Компания, которая изобрела будущее и продала его конкуренту за миллион долларов Сегодня привычно спорить, кто «на самом деле» придумал очередной прорывной интерфейс — компания, которая показала технологию первой, или та, что довела ее до массового продукта и заработала на этом миллиарды. Спор не новый. Полвека назад в этой роли уже побывали исследовательский центр Xerox PARC и молодая компания Apple — и всё решилось…
🔥13👍6❤2
Posted without readable text
😁5❤2custom 53733554328006938862
США опять строят стену. Только теперь от китайского ИИ (и заплатят за это не китайцы) Вашингтон, по данным South China Morning Post, снова прикидывает, как прикрыть американцам доступ к китайским ИИ-моделям с открытыми весами. Логика стандартна: раз Китай вырывается вперёд в open-weight, ему надо срочно перекрыть кислород. Нюанс один — платить за это будут не в Пекине. Математику посчитал доцент Школы бизнеса Schel…
custom 53733554328006938864❤3🔥1
Российский бизнес массово осваивает ИИ, но вменяемой финансовой отдачи пока не видно. Казалось бы, можно обвинить в этом регуляторику или санкции, но при ближайшем рассмотрении оказывается, что это один в один та же ситуация, что и за рубежом. Это следует из исследования «ИИ-агенты: где хайп, а где реальность», подготовленного консалтингом «Яков и Партнеры». Давайте смотреть, что там интересного в нашей рубрике #анал…
❤4custom 53733554328006938864🔥2
Showing the 12 most recent of 24 posts we hold for @korolevsnotes. 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 — 319,695 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.
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.
Named by 2 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.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
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.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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.
“Грустный Киберпанк” (@korolevsnotes), 6,466 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/korolevsnotes.
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.