одразу мінус 1 підписка. це мабуть дружина....
🤣26😁4👍3

Channel
@shtuchka_intelekt
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
11,548subscribers
+122 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001869336612 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @shtuchka_intelekt |
| Created | Between 1 October 2022 and 30 September 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 18 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 32 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 18 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/shtuchka_intelekt |
Film & TV — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 40% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 18 Sept 2026, 19:39 | 11,548 | +16 |
| 16 Sept 2026, 14:40 | 11,532 | +1 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 17:41 | 11,531 | +15 |
| 13 Sept 2026, 03:39 | 11,516 | +1 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 08:58 | 11,515 | +44 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 11:36 | 11,471 | -3 |
| 5 Sept 2026, 04:37 | 11,474 | -3 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 09:52 | 11,477 | -9 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 01:25 | 11,486 | +1 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 03:15 | 11,485 | +4 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 04:47 | 11,481 | +2 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 06:45 | 11,479 | +8 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 06:46 | 11,471 | +8 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 05:44 | 11,463 | -3 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 03:44 | 11,466 | +4 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 05:25 | 11,462 | +7 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 03:28 | 11,455 | -4 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 23:15 | 11,459 | -1 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 03:58 | 11,460 | +5 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 21:37 | 11,455 | first reading |
80 posts held, back to 5 August 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 44 pages of 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 2 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 80 (5 August 2026 – 2 September 2026) |
| Views total | 27,026 |
| Reactions total | 459 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 2 Sept 2026, 23:52 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.
Measured directly from 35 videos 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.
1,732 reactions across 79 posts, in 31 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 35.9% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 622 | 35.9% | |
| 👍 | 255 | 14.7% | |
| ❤🔥 | 238 | 13.7% | |
| 😁 | 175 | 10.1% | |
| 🤣 | 113 | 6.52% | |
| 🌭 | 78 | 4.50% | |
| custom 5386587088873331829 | 53 | 3.06% | |
| 😱 | 25 | 1.44% | |
| 👏 | 24 | 1.39% | |
| 🤝 | 21 | 1.21% | |
| 🌚 | 19 | 1.10% | |
| 🤯 | 19 | 1.10% | |
| 😍 | 15 | 0.866% | |
| 💯 | 12 | 0.693% | |
| 👀 | 11 | 0.635% | |
| 🤩 | 9 | 0.52% | |
| 🗿 | 7 | 0.404% | |
| 🤷♂ | 6 | 0.346% | |
| 👌 | 5 | 0.289% | |
| 😢 | 4 | 0.231% | |
| 11 further kinds | 21 | 1.21% |
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 is Telegram’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 79 of the 80 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 1,732 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 80 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 2 September 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 @shtuchka_intelekt. 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 80 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 5 August 2026 to 2 September 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.
одразу мінус 1 підписка. це мабуть дружина....
🤣26😁4👍3
#mood Зараз в мережі віруситься нова реклама Клін Кляйнів з Седі Сінк. Зробили свою версію. Яка краща? п.с. ставте вогник, і якщо буде 100 то викладемо детальний туторіал, як робити таке відео. 🚀 TG | 📺 YT |🤪 IG
🔥37😁18🤩3😱2🌭1👏1
#news #higgsfield #AIvideo Higgsfield Genjutsu: дорого, довго і без джитсу 😫🍩👾 Higgsfield викотили новенький функціонал Genjutsu і продають, як офігезну к маніпуляцію реальністю у відео. Але це той самий motion transfer, зібраний, судячи з усього, поверх Seedance 2.5: рух і камеру знімають прямо з вашого відео і накладають на промпт з референсами. Карт глибини воно при цьому не будує, і саме звідси всі проблеми із …
❤🔥6🔥3🌭1
#mood Новина за два останні дні одним фото. Ви вже самі вирішуйте як вам та gemini flash 3.8 ultra pro max і Claude Fable 5.1 nano big dick 200 🚀 TG | 📺 YT |🤪 IG
🤣5💯2custom 53865870888733318292🤗1
#use #elevenlabs #Claude ElevenLabs MCP: транскрибація прямо в Claude ElevenLabs нарешті зробили нормальний конектор до Claude. Ставиться в один клік з директорії конекторів, вхід через OAuth, API-ключі не потрібні. Права видаєте самі - від режиму тільки читати до повного керування агентами. Найкорисніше тут speech to text. Досі транскрибація в Claude була болем: він ішов шукати по інтернету, тягнув купу зайвого і…
🔥12👍5🌭2
#news #Anthropic #Claude Claude Fable 5.1 вийшов 🤖 Anthropic сьогодні викатив Claude Fable 5.1 і закритий Mythos 5.1: та сама модель, менше запобіжників, доступ лише перевіреним організаціям зі США. Токени коштують як і раніше, $10 / $50 за мільйон. Здешевили одне - читання з кешу, вчетверо. Заявлений приріст лежить у довгих агентних сесіях: код на кілька годин, ресерч у кілька кроків, документи, таблиці та слайди …
👍6😱2🔥1
#tests Minimax H3 проти Minimax H3 MAX. Хто кращий? 😅🤖🤡 Зараз в інтернеті несеться саме про H3 MAX. Чому? Бо він має відкриті ваги, дешевший, швидший. Це версія дотренована звичайними вайбкодерами для таких самих вайбкодерів. Підвищені параметри говоріння, алайменту та візуальної естетики і роботи з референсами. Ми зробили 13 тестів, оновили сторінку minimax і порівняння зі звичайною версію та іншими відео моделям…
👍12🔥8🌭2
#mood Сьогодні новин мало, тому просто подивіться це відео. Пишіть в коментах, якщо хочете продовження. промпт нижче. SCENE 1 (0:00-0:29.8) — SETUP → ESCALATION → SIGNATURE → AFTERMATH SHOT STRUCTURE: motion-transfer from @Video 1, 29.8 seconds total, 16:9, 24 fps, the shot count, cut points and shot durations taken from @Video 1 exactly as they occur, no added shots REFS: @Video 1 = source performance and dep…
🔥7😁7👏3🤣2❤🔥1🌭1😭1
Якого контенту хочете тут більше?
The shares total 280%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
❤🔥10🤩6🍓2
#спілкуємось Хочемо тестувати не все підряд, а те, що потрібно саме вам! Чому? Моделей виходить більше, ніж встигає будь-хто. Навіть ми)). Але напрямків багато, а час один. Тож: чого тут має бути більше?
🤝8👍4custom 53865870888733318292
#use Актуальні ціни на Seedance 2.5 можна побачити на нашому сайті 🚀 TG | 📺 YT |🤪 IG
🔥10👍6❤🔥3🌭3🗿1
#news Кому Seedance 2.5 в 4к? на wavespeed викотили версію в 4к. Все круто! Тільки є нюанс. 1 секунда коштує...$1,62. А відео на 30 секунд $48,6 🚀 TG | 📺 YT |🤪 IG
🤯18🗿3😱2👀1👍1😨1😭1
Showing the 12 most recent of 80 posts we hold for @shtuchka_intelekt. 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.
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.
Якого контенту хочете тут більше?
The shares total 280%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not 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 80 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 2 September 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.
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.
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.
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 3 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists 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 18 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Штучка Інтелект” (@shtuchka_intelekt), 11,548 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/shtuchka_intelekt.
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.