Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Max: AI, Engineering and Startups

@max_about_ai

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

11,664subscribers

-18 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-1002017563240
TypeChannel
Username@max_about_ai
DescriptionАвторский канал про ИИ, разработку и стартапы от Head of AI & Product Engineering. Стараюсь писать полезно и кратко. Делюсь возможностями, лайфхаками, личным опытом, ресёрчем и рефлексией. Фидбек, советы, предложения: MaxAboutAI@gmail.com
CreatedBetween 1 November 2023 and 31 May 2024— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held8
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/max_about_ai

Growth

11,66111,68911,6756 August 2026 — 11,682 subscribers6 August 2026 — 11,682 subscribers6 August 2026 — 11,689 subscribers7 August 2026 — 11,664 subscribers8 August 2026 — 11,670 subscribers9 August 2026 — 11,665 subscribers10 August 2026 — 11,661 subscribers12 August 2026 — 11,664 subscribers11,6646 August 202612 August 2026
8 measurements spanning 7 days, net -18. 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 11,657–11,693 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 20:2411,664+3
10 Aug 2026, 20:5711,661-4
9 Aug 2026, 23:3511,665-5
8 Aug 2026, 21:3011,670+6
7 Aug 2026, 20:0611,664-25
6 Aug 2026, 22:0211,689+7
6 Aug 2026, 02:3511,682no change
6 Aug 2026, 01:0011,682first reading

Engagement

21 posts held, back to 28 December 2025the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 16 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
27.3%
avg views ÷ 11,664 subscribers
Avg views / post
3,190
1 post measured
Reaction rate
1.47%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1
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.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026
Posts held21 (28 December 20257 August 2026)
Views total3,190
Reactions total47
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken13 Aug 2026, 03:58 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
14
Videos
2
Links
65

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 13 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.

Reaction mix

1,522 reactions across 20 posts, in 26 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 35.3% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍53735.3%
41227.1%
🔥29019.1%
🤮956.24%
💯664.34%
😁422.76%
👎150.986%
🥰120.788%
😱90.591%
🤡90.591%
👏40.263%
😴40.263%
🤔40.263%
🌚30.197%
👌30.197%
🗿30.197%
🤣30.197%
❤‍🔥20.131%
🥱20.131%
🐳10.066%
6 further kinds60.394%

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 21 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 1,608reactions 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 28 December 2025 to 7 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
10
across the posts below
Posts paid on
5
of 21 we hold a reading for · 24%
Most on one post
4
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @max_about_ai. 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 28 December 2025 to 7 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

7 Aug 2026, 08:48 UTC≈3,190 views47 reactionsread 13 August 2026

Почему я пока не верю в универсальные темные фабрики софта (dark software factory) Несколько месяцев назад появился тренд на построение полностью автоматизированных фабрик софта: систему, в которой AI-агенты получают цели, а дальше сами формируют задачи, пишут код, запускают тесты и выкатывают изменения в прод, без какого либо участия людей. Эффективным менеджерам далеким от разработки эта идея кажется отличной. Мо

👍2211🔥7👎3🗿3💯1

6 Jul 2026, 11:31 UTC≈7,740 views61 reactionsread 13 August 2026

Ликбез про RAG. ч.2. Фундаментальные ошибки. За последние 3 года я пообщался с десятком+ команд из разных компаний, работающих над приложениями на основе RAG. Две самые частые ошибки, которые я встречал: - плохая подготовка данных - garbage-in > garbage-out, - отсутствие evaluation (оценки качества) - не возможно улучшать то, что не измеряешь. Разумеется, существует множество других проблем, но это фундамент для в

🔥33👍1711

16 Jun 2026, 15:34 UTC≈10,700 views73 reactionsread 13 August 2026

Про Fable 5 Я успел протестировать Fable 5 до его блокировки, но не успел закончить тесты. Дождаться разблокировки не удалось, так что поделюсь тем, что есть: 1⃣ Fable гораздо лаконичнее других моделей. Ответы именно лаконичнее, а не короче, то есть плотность информации выше, чем у других моделей. Мне это очень нравится, не люблю воду в текстах. 2⃣ Ответы Fable на прямолинейные замечания могут иметь яркую эмоциона

37👍19😱8🔥7👌1🤯1

3 Jun 2026, 16:15 UTC≈10,700 views29 reactionsread 13 August 2026

Мне интересно читать каналы, где автор не пересказывает позавчерашней Твиттер или презентации БигТехов, а делится своими мыслями по интересной мне теме. Когда 6 лет назад мне пришлось начать совмещать роль Technical Product Manager с моей основной ролью, я искал что бы почитать по новой для меня роли и нашел канал Ани Подображных. Сегодня хочу его порекомендовать, потому что до сих пор читаю. Мне нравится, что посты

17👍5❤‍🔥2🤮2👌1💩1🔥1

21 May 2026, 08:49 UTC≈11,700 views151 reactionsread 13 August 2026
Photo

AI ликбез: RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation) ч.1 Решил, что RAG как концепция настолько важен для современных AI приложений, что несмотря на широкую общеизвестность, все равно заслуживает отдельной серии постов в канале. 1️⃣ RAG (Retrieval Augmented Generation) - это подход, когда перед генерацией LLM ответа, приложение ищет релевантую информацию в внешних данных и добавляет ее в контекст вопроса, делая генераци

👍8144🔥25🐳1

3 May 2026, 11:23 UTC≈11,600 views61 reactions1 Starread 13 August 2026

Про AI research На этой недели моя AI лаба опубликовала первые научные статьи по AI engineering на arXiv (объяснимость ответов в graph RAG и синтетический эвал для LLM приложений). Команда - большие молодцы, потому что они справились, несмотря на огромное количество препятствий на нашем пути. Не буду пересказывать статьи, поделюсь лишь нескольким практическими выводами, которые я сделал по ходу исследований: 1⃣ Gr

👍2824🔥8🥰1

21 Apr 2026, 12:15 UTC≈11,100 views51 reactionsread 13 August 2026

Провел две недели отпуска в роад-трипе. Как писал выше, поиск use cases для применения AI не проще, чем освоение самих инструментов, поэтому решил поделиться парочкой сценариев использования, чем сам пользовался в путешествие. 1️⃣ Перевод фото меню, объяснение состава и выбор подходящих блюд из меню с помощью ChatGPT. Перевод меню в классических переводчиках обычно работает плохо и не объясняет что ожидать от блюда.

👍329🔥4👎3🥱2👌1

1 Apr 2026, 06:45 UTC≈12,300 views154 reactionsread 13 August 2026

Банально, но факт - сейчас открыто окно беспрецедентных возможностей. Как долго оно будет открыто и что наступит после - я не знаю, но точно знаю, что если делать что-то свое, то сейчас отличное время пробовать. Поэтому моя жена решила открыть свой мини-стартап на международный рынок. Хочет бутсрапить небольшие SaaS приложения. С вайб-кодингом это стало сильно проще, тем более, что у нее айтишный бэкграунд и образо

🤮93👍2612🔥8👎7🤡3😁3💊1

27 Mar 2026, 14:22 UTC≈12,400 views70 reactionsread 13 August 2026

Про универсальных AI агентов Последний месяц эксперементирую с Claude Cowork, OpenClaw и Manus. Мои краткие выводы: 0️⃣ Если у вас FOMO, что все вокруг в 10 раз эффективнее благодаря OpenClaw и другим AI агентам, то можете перестать нервничать - технологии все еще далеки от совершенства. Пока хайпа все еще больше чем пользы. Значит ли это, что не надо их пробовать или использовать? Нет! Потому что уже сейчас можно

🔥3616👍10💯4👏2👎1🙏1

19 Mar 2026, 15:19 UTC≈10,600 views60 reactions2 Starsread 13 August 2026

Поучаствовал в подкасте про Product Engineering. Вместе с Юрой Агеевым, автором подкаста Make Sense, поговорили про будущее ролей в разработке, кто такие Product Engineer, как ими стать если вы уже разработчик или продакт менеджер. Не обошли стороной вайб-кодинг и AI для личной эффективности. Из разговора мне больше всего запомнилась история Юры про его опыт с AI агентами. У него кастомная команда агентов поверх Cla

😁2520👍10🔥4🤷‍♂1

14 Mar 2026, 08:18 UTC≈12,900 views58 reactionsread 13 August 2026

Наконец дошли руки посмотреть материалы курса Stanford “CS146S: The Modern Software Developer”. Видеозаписей, к сожалению, в открытом доступе нет, но есть презентации и отличная подборка материалов для чтения и просмотра. Мне особенно понравилась презентация про Code Review. Навык, который всегда был важным, но c 2025 года стал еще важнее. Если собеседуете кандидатов - обязательно добавляйте задачки на код ревью, а

29👍21🔥7🤣1

3 Mar 2026, 13:23 UTC≈13,600 views60 reactions1 Starread 13 August 2026

Про документацию в эпоху AI Пару недель назад делал доклад про документацию в эпоху AI. Записи у меня к сожалению нет, но поделюсь основными тезисами: 1⃣ AI сильно упростил не только написание кода, но и генерацию документации. Нужна ли она, если теперь есть возможно получить ответы на естественном языке прямо по коду? Я считаю, что да. 2⃣ Надо разделять документацию по критерию - является ли она источником истины

👍3614🔥7🤣2🤔1

Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @max_about_ai. 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.

Polls

The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.

26 Jan 2026, 10:29 UTCAnonymous Poll2,040 voters approx.

Какой процент кода за вас пишет AI?

  1. 0%4%
  2. 0.01% - 10%5%
  3. 10% - 30%6%
  4. 30% - 60%7%
  5. 60% - 90%16%
  6. 90% - 99.9%20%
  7. 100%21%
  8. Посмотреть результаты21%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.

The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.

Read from the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 28 December 2025 to 7 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 366,343 of 1,160,990entries 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.

Mentions

Named by 7 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.

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.

“Max: AI, Engineering and Startups” (@max_about_ai), 11,664 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/max_about_ai.

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.