Channel
@tech_shpilman
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
532subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 8 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003888891161 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @tech_shpilman |
| Description | Авторский канал Алексея Шпильмана обо всем и ни о чем. |
| Created | Between 1 February 2026 and 10 June 2026— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 8 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/tech_shpilman |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Aug 2026, 03:50 | 532 | no change |
| 8 Aug 2026, 01:00 | 532 | first reading |
8 posts held, back to 10 June 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 1 pageof 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 5 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 8 (10 June 2026 – 5 August 2026) |
| Views total | 2,614 |
| Reactions total | 118 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 03:50 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 8 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.
272 reactions across 8 posts, in 16 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 35.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 97 | 35.7% | |
| 👍 | 71 | 26.1% | |
| ❤ | 58 | 21.3% | |
| 🤩 | 6 | 2.21% | |
| ❤🔥 | 5 | 1.84% | |
| 🙏 | 5 | 1.84% | |
| 🤓 | 5 | 1.84% | |
| ✍ | 4 | 1.47% | |
| 👏 | 4 | 1.47% | |
| ⚡ | 3 | 1.10% | |
| 🆒 | 3 | 1.10% | |
| 😍 | 3 | 1.10% | |
| 🙉 | 3 | 1.10% | |
| 🤔 | 2 | 0.735% | |
| 🤯 | 2 | 0.735% | |
| 💯 | 1 | 0.368% |
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 8 of the 8 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 272reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 8 most recent posts we hold, published 10 June 2026 to 5 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.
🎓 Где сильнее всего видно влияние ИИ? — На уровне школьных проектов) На днях в очередной раз прошли «Большие вызовы». Для тех, кто не знает: это поистине уникальное мероприятие Сириуса. На нем школьники в командах сначала учатся разному у спецов из индустрии в формате выполнения проектов, а в финале приезжают на три недели в Сириус и решают реальные задачи отрасли, имея возможность консультироваться при этом с топо…
🔥14👍6💯1
🤖 Интересная дискуссия развернулась по поводу open-weights моделей – после того, как стало известно об инициативах в правительстве США по запрету использования китайских моделей в американских компаниях. Дженсен Хуанг (CEO NVIDIA) – с еще семью десятками ИТ- и ИИ-лидерами – написал открытое письмо, в котором заявил, что open source – это, вообще-то, замечательно, да и open-weight тоже, так что не надо, пожалуйста, н…
❤8🔥5⚡3😍3
Разбор первого вопроса в новой рубрике #Шпильман_отвечает – и сразу с претензией на философию: 🪬Может ли у ИИ появиться интуиция? Спойлер: смотря что считать интуицией. Разбираюсь ниже. Итак, вопрос очень приятный, потому что на него можно обоснованно ответить и «да», и «нет» – все упирается в определение интуиции. Есть две школы мысли, которые условно можно разделить на механическую и психобиологическую, она же …
👍7🤓5✍4❤2🔥2🤯2
Из Тюмени плавно переместились в Женеву, где проходили одновременно два мероприятия ООН – Global Dialogue on AI Governance и форум AI for Good. Первый день глобального диалога выглядел так: Антониу Гутерриш вдохновил всех, сказав, что «нельзя навайбкодить будущее» и что «мы последнее поколение, которое еще может решать, в какую сторону развиваются технологии», но при этом ничего конкретного он не предложил. Следом …
🔥26❤15🤩6👍5👏4
Одно из самых интересных мероприятий по ИИ, которое проходит в России — это форум про ИИ в высшем образовании в Тюмени. Здесь тоже хватает философских и этических рассуждений на тему того, стоит ли вообще пускать ИИ в образование или не стоит, но большинство участников уже принимают новую реальность и вместе пытаются придумать, как же с ней жить, и, что наиболее интересно, как мы можем провести эксперимент, чтобы най…
🔥22❤13❤🔥4
Самое интересное, что можно вайбкодить, — это, конечно, игрушки. Пока я вынашиваю планы повторить успех E33, коллеги навайбкодили максимально залипательную штуку — @LossMonkeyBot. В ней всё прекрасно: и флаппибердовость, и ML-ные отсылки, и факты про обезьянок 🐒 Самое оригинальное приглашение на конфу, которое я видел. Судя по этому, сама Turbo ML тоже будет крайне клевой. Ничего не планируйте на 18-е июля.
🔥10👍6🙉3❤1🤔1
Федеральный закон об ИИ дотолкали таки до Госдумы. В процессе, путем совместных усилий, из него убрали практически всё, кроме мер, направленных на поддержку российских разработчиков больших фундаментальных моделей. Новое название закона это тоже отразило — теперь он не о «регулировании технологий ИИ», а о «поддержке развития технологий ИИ». Вообще финал крайне разумен. Да, конечно, остались ещё шероховатости, но ко …
👍25🔥10🙏5❤3🤔1
На ПМЭФ самое интересное — это была молодежь. И в молодежный день на самом форуме, и молодежь на Т-Дворе. Молодежь очень много думает про ИИ и задает все более и более интересные вопросы. «Всех ли нас заменит ИИ?» уже никого не интересует, каждый сам для себя ответил. Самыми интересными вопросами (и своими ответами) и поделюсь: В: Какая была бы ваша эмоция, неподдельная, если бы вы сейчас пошли в Эрмитаж, и когда в…
👍22❤16🔥8🆒3❤🔥1
Showing the 8 most recent of 8 posts we hold for @tech_shpilman. 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 — 472,997 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.
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.
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.
“ТехноЛоджия” (@tech_shpilman), 532 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/tech_shpilman.
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.