Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

PAPAI SOFT

@papaisoft

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry

592subscribers

+1 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001954234150
TypeChannel
Username@papaisoft
CreatedBetween 1 March 2023 and 31 October 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded8 August 2026
Last confirmed live8 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 8 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/papaisoft

Growth

591592591.57 Aug 2026, 16:56 — 591 subscribers8 Aug 2026, 03:17 — 591 subscribers8 Aug 2026, 16:37 — 592 subscribers7 Aug 2026, 16:568 Aug 2026, 16:37
3 measurements taken within a single day, net +1. 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 591–592 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
8 Aug 2026, 16:37592+1
8 Aug 2026, 03:17591no change
7 Aug 2026, 16:56591first reading

Engagement

14 posts held, back to 29 May 2025the 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 · 30 days
19.4%
avg views ÷ 592 subscribers
Avg views / post
115
1 post measured
Reaction rate
12.2%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1
of 14 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 20 July 2026
Posts held14 (29 May 202520 July 2026)
Views total115
Reactions total14
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken8 Aug 2026, 03:17 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

307 reactions across 14 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 22.5% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
custom 54295471814240065536922.5%
🔥6420.8%
5116.6%
👍278.79%
😁196.19%
🤯196.19%
🦄175.54%
🗿123.91%
👏72.28%
❤‍🔥41.30%
💯41.30%
🤣41.30%
custom 538894533945145505330.977%
🙏30.977%
🍾20.651%
💩10.326%
🤬10.326%

Custom emoji. 2 of the rows above are 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 counts beside them areTelegram’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 14 of the 14 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 307reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 14 most recent posts we hold, published 29 May 2025 to 20 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
57
across the posts below
Posts paid on
10
of 14 we hold a reading for · 71%
Most on one post
13
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @papaisoft. 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 14 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 May 2025 to 20 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.

Recent posts

20 Jul 2026, 14:56 UTC115 views14 reactionsread 8 August 2026

Posted without readable text

6👍3custom 54295471814240065533🔥2

Signed Sergey Poluhin

6 Jul 2026, 12:53 UTC178 views16 reactions10 Starsread 8 August 2026
File

File, posted without a caption

6custom 54295471814240065534👍3🔥3

Signed Sergey Poluhin

6 Jul 2026, 12:53 UTC175 views15 reactions4 Starsread 8 August 2026
Photo

Штрафы за ChatGPT? Всем привет! Технологии нейросетей очень быстро развиваются, а следом за ними поспевает законодательство. В новом формате блога рассмотрим самые острые вопросы: • Нужна ли маркировка для ИИ-контента? • Есть ли запрет на использование иностранных моделей? • Как работать с "суверенными" ИИ-моделями? Читайте по ссылке или смотрите презентацию в следующем сообщении 🍎

6🗿4🙏3👍2

Signed Sergey Poluhin

4 Jul 2026, 14:23 UTC147 views18 reactions2 Starsread 8 August 2026
Photo

📈 Лучший маркетинговый ход? Привет! В одном из апрельских дайджестов новостей я уже рассказывал про Mythos — новую модель от Anthropic. Тогда я в шутку обозвал это кибероружием — потому что компания так «испугалась» результатов, что дала доступ к модели только 50 компаниям вроде Apple или Google. Спустя месяц Anthropic выкатывает Fable 5 (а где 1, 2, 3, 4?) — отфильтрованную версию того самого Mythos. Якобы всё то

🦄75🗿3custom 54295471814240065532🤣1

Signed Sergey Poluhin

22 Jun 2026, 12:44 UTC178 views20 reactions7 Starsread 8 August 2026

Почему частные клиники теряют до 30% пациентов ещё до приёма? Недавно мы анонсировали в сообществе SPB Founders наш новый продукт — Papai MedScale. Коротко — это набор готовых модулей и приложений для быстрой автоматизации частной медицины, стоматологий, клиник. В следующих постах я подробно расскажу про каждый отдельный блок: 🍎 - Автоматизация первой линии 🤖 - Анализ звонков администраторов 🗓 - Запись клиентов 2

🔥84👍4💯2custom 54295471814240065532

Signed Sergey Poluhin

20 Apr 2026, 12:20 UTC353 views22 reactions5 Starsread 8 August 2026

Бойкот ChatGPT, лекарство от СДВГ за сутки и как адвокату потерять лицензию из-за ИИ — главные новости мира AI за последнюю неделю 🤭OpenAI слил данные Пентагону На прошлой неделе OpenAI договорился о развёртывании своего AI на засекреченных сетях Министерства обороны США. Казалось бы, что могло пойти не так? Движение #QuitGPT набрало 2,5 млн участников, удаления ChatGPT выросли на 295% за ночь. Anthropic отказался

🔥9custom 54295471814240065537😁4👏1🤯1

Signed Sergey Poluhin

13 Apr 2026, 12:16 UTC300 views23 reactions3 Starsread 8 August 2026

Новое кибероружие, 15 млн $ убытков в день с оценкой в триллион и взлом биткоина за 9 минут — дайджест новостей за последнюю неделю 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️ OpenAI закрыла Sora Два года после запуска OpenAI закрывает один из самых интересных своих инструментов. Причина проста — экономика. Сделка с Диснеем на 1млрд $? Расторгнута. Больше 3х миллионов активных пользователей? Теперь меньше 500т. Так, сжигая ежедневно 15 млн $ н

🤯7😁65custom 54295471814240065533🔥2

Signed Sergey Poluhin

10 Apr 2026, 13:30 UTC216 views22 reactions8 Starsread 8 August 2026
Photo

💃🏼 Claude знает о твоей любовнице …и готов использовать это В последнем посте я рассказывал, как Claude корректирует свое поведение, считывая ваше недовольство. А что мы знаем про его собственные “эмоции”? Умеет ли он бояться или злиться? И главное — как это влияет на его ответы? Anthropic составила список из 171 эмоции — от “довольный” и “испуганный” до “тоскливый” и “уверенный”. Попросили Claude Sonnet 4.5 написа

🤯9custom 54295471814240065536😁3custom 53889453394514550533👏1

Signed Sergey Poluhin

6 Apr 2026, 13:25 UTC220 views28 reactions3 Starsread 8 August 2026

Счетчик матершины На прошлой неделе произошло интересное событие — Anthropic случайно слила полмиллиона строк кода своего ИИ агента Claude. Чего там только не нашли — новые механизмы работы, ещё не анонсированные инструменты, встроенный тамагочи — и много чего ещё! Инженеры OpenAI и DeepSeek буквально получили подарок от самого сильного конкурента Важно, что сама нейросеть никуда не утекла. Веса, модели и вся «подк

🦄10custom 54295471814240065537🗿5😁31🤣1🤬1

Signed Sergey Poluhin

21 Feb 2026, 16:51 UTC482 views23 reactions2 Starsread 8 August 2026

Как слить 50 000 000 на ИИ? 🆕 Друзья, приглашаем вас на вебинар с основателем и CTO Papai Soft 🍎— Сергеем Полухиным: 📆 Пятница, 27 февраля 2026 в 19:00 (МСК) Реальные кейсы, как бизнес тратит миллионы на ИИ и не получает ничего. Разбираем ошибки на примере наших клиентов и партнёров — чтобы вы их не повторили. На вебинаре: — Почему дорогие решения не работают — Какие задачи ИИ реально решает, а какие — нет — Чек-

🔥8👍5custom 54295471814240065534❤‍🔥2🍾2😁2

31 Aug 2025, 11:25 UTC≈1,650 views26 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Photo

ИИ нас всех заменит 😯 Нет. Спасибо что читали, подписывайтесь! Говоря серьезно, давайте обсудим этот вопрос. Внедряя автоматизацию мы время от времени сталкиваемся с сильным сопротивлением среди сотрудников клиента. Причем руководители и директоры как правило за! Откуда такая разность мнений? Вы скажете: «чертовы капиталисты!», я скажу — «разное восприятие!» Сотрудники боятся: придет злой ИИ, а их всех непремен

custom 54295471814240065538🔥7👍5💯2🤣2👏1😁1

Signed Sergey Poluhin

21 Jun 2025, 16:43 UTC988 views30 reactions13 Starsread 8 August 2026
Photo

ПМЭФ Всем привет! В Петербурге международный экономический форум. А какая экономика без автоматизации? Так и мы не остались в стороне, а точнее наши клиенты 🍎 Какая самая главная проблема больших мероприятий? Сбор контактов! К вам подходят потенциальные клиенты — им нужно отсканировать QRы, заполнить анкетку, зарегистрироваться... И тут ни слова о продукте, который вы представляете! Что если совместить ваш продукт

🔥10custom 5429547181424006553107👍3

Signed Sergey Poluhin

Showing the 12 most recent of 14 posts we hold for @papaisoft. 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 — 1,011,837 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.

Mentions

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.

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.

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.

“PAPAI SOFT” (@papaisoft), 592 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/papaisoft.

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.