К середине рабочей недели выгорел даже ChatGPT. @techmedia
🔥81😁66👏5

Channel
@techmedia
On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · View velocity · Reactions · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Telegram's recommendations · Domains linked from posts · Cite this entry
1,352,710subscribers
+33,222 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among the largest entries.
| Telegram ID | -1001208526041 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @techmedia |
| Description | Просто крутейший канал о диджитале, IT и технологиях. Написать в редакцию: @techeditor_bot Сотрудничество: @magicdennis Канал включён в реестр: https://clck.ru/3FUrPJ |
| Created | 12 September 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 | 7 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/techmedia |
Technology — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 8 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 89% 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.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Posts published here appear word for word on 3 other registered channels. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @techmedia/16421 · this entry4 Oct 2025, 13:50 UTC | @trendach/131884 Oct 2025, 13:58 UTC | 1.00 | 8 minutes |
| @techmedia/17149 · this entry6 Nov 2025, 15:00 UTC | @trendach/137946 Nov 2025, 15:09 UTC | 1.00 | 10 minutes |
| @techmedia/17377 · this entry17 Nov 2025, 08:26 UTC | @trendach/1403017 Nov 2025, 08:37 UTC | 1.00 | 12 minutes |
| @techmedia/17923 · this entry10 Dec 2025, 13:23 UTC | @trendach/1449910 Dec 2025, 14:17 UTC | 1.00 | 53 minutes |
| @trendach/1452711 Dec 2025, 08:07 UTC | @techmedia/17944 · this entry11 Dec 2025, 08:36 UTC | 1.00 | 29 minutes |
| @techmedia/18218 · this entry22 Dec 2025, 10:33 UTC | @trendach/1480122 Dec 2025, 10:37 UTC | 1.00 | 4 minutes |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @trendach | 22 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 14 minutes | this entry (13–9) |
| @ititochka | 11 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 0.95 | 6 days | this entry (11–0) |
| @neirosety | 5 (5/5 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 0.94 | 13 hours | this entry (5–0) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 9 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 3,531 comparable posts for this entry, running 29 September 2025 to 7 August 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Across the whole group of 4, the earliest publisher we hold is @trendach. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the keys clone_mutual · clone_source, last confirmed 7 August 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 3 other registered channels, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 05:43 | 1,352,710 | -3,127 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 07:02 | 1,355,837 | -182 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 04:22 | 1,356,019 | +2,727 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 02:30 | 1,353,292 | +3,913 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 00:56 | 1,349,379 | +5,406 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 23:21 | 1,343,973 | +24,485 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 00:41 | 1,319,488 | first reading |
4,241 posts held, back to 28 September 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 297 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 12 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 4,241 (28 September 2025 – 12 August 2026) |
| Views total | 13,270,760 |
| Reactions total | 151,518 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Aug 2026, 23:07 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Measured directly from 22 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.
How fast this channel’s own posts pick up views, from re-reading them repeatedly in the hours and days after they were published rather than the single reading most entries on this register get. Coverage is early and only a small minority of channels hold it at all — a gap in this section means the post has not been re-read again yet, not that nothing happened.
Computed from 89 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days: across 73of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 3.1 hours of being posted; a typical post has already reached 31.8% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 74.0% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 27,900 views — 2.06% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 32,340).
| Post | Readings | Latest reading | Curve | 24h reach | Half of last-observed views by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| /2257612 Aug 2026, 21:03 UTC | 425 minutes – 2.1 hours old | 5,560 views ~152 reactions | 60 minutes: 4,340still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 25 minutesupper bound — already past half at first reading · provisional — final view count still climbing |
| /2257512 Aug 2026, 19:56 UTC | 625 minutes – 3.2 hours old | 12,400 views ~277 reactions | 60 minutes: 8,600 → 3.0 hours: 12,296 interp.still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 26 minutesprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /2257112 Aug 2026, 18:25 UTC | 852 minutes – 4.7 hours old | 17,200 views ~240 reactions | 60 minutes: 7,591 interp. → 3.0 hours: 16,000still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 82 minutesprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /2257012 Aug 2026, 17:01 UTC | 1115 minutes – 6.1 hours old | 15,700 views ~143 reactions | 60 minutes: 5,892 interp. → 3.0 hours: 12,043 interp. → 6.0 hours: 15,700still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 1.5 hoursprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /2256912 Aug 2026, 16:17 UTC | 1224 minutes – 6.8 hours old | 16,000 views ~187 reactions | 60 minutes: 7,010 → 3.0 hours: 12,600 → 6.0 hours: 15,700still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 72 minutesprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /2256812 Aug 2026, 15:58 UTC | 1313 minutes – 7.1 hours old | 15,900 views ~76 reactions | 60 minutes: 7,272 interp. → 3.0 hours: 12,283 interp. → 6.0 hours: 15,600still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 71 minutesprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /2256712 Aug 2026, 14:43 UTC | 1518 minutes – 8.4 hours old | 18,900 views ~192 reactions | 60 minutes: 8,656 interp. → 3.0 hours: 15,000 → 6.0 hours: 18,100still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 72 minutesprovisional — final view count still climbing |
| /2256512 Aug 2026, 14:20 UTC | 166 minutes – 8.8 hours old | 18,800 views ~194 reactions | 60 minutes: 8,933 interp. → 3.0 hours: 14,300 → 6.0 hours: 17,800still climbing at last reading | not yet at 24h | 67 minutesprovisional — final view count still climbing |
Curve is every standard checkpoint we hold a reading for (+1h, +3h, +6h, +12h, +24h, +48h, +7d after posting) — measured where a real reading landed close enough to that age, interpolated where it did not but readings on both sides let one be worked out between them. Nothing is ever extrapolated past the last real reading. Latest reading is the newest view and reaction count we hold for the post, side by side, so a gap between how views and reactions moved is visible without following it into the Observations section above. 24h reach is that one checkpoint on its own, labelled the same way. Half of last-observed viewsis the age at which a post’s view count crossed half of the highest figure we have read for it so far — an upper bound when the very first reading was already past half (we cannot see the actual crossing), and biased low while the post is still climbing, since “half of final” is dividing by a number that has not finished growing yet. Both caveats are printed inline wherever they apply, never silently dropped.
39,213 reactions across 107 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 38.5% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 😁 | 15,089 | 38.5% | |
| 🤯 | 5,821 | 14.8% | |
| 🔥 | 5,197 | 13.3% | |
| 👍 | 4,955 | 12.6% | |
| 😭 | 4,646 | 11.8% | |
| 👏 | 2,180 | 5.56% | |
| 🫡 | 1,325 | 3.38% |
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 1,000 of the 1,000 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 408,672reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 31 May 2026 to 12 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.
К середине рабочей недели выгорел даже ChatGPT. @techmedia
🔥81😁66👏5
В Telegram вышел подарок с мишкой, у которого… в руках бомба, а за спиной — автомат 🫠 Это какой уровень иронии? @techmedia
😁189🔥57🤯19👍12
Солнечное затмение прямо сейчас наблюдают по всему миру — в Исландии на несколько минут наступила полная темнота 😱 В России лучше всего затмение было видно на северо-западе страны: в Мурманске, Архангельске, Пскове, Петрозаводске, Санкт-Петербурге и Калининграде. В следующий раз жители европейской части РФ увидят подобное явление только в 2061 году. @techmedia
🔥115😭45👏29🤯25👍16🫡10
Работники по всему миру начали копить на выгорание — пишет Business Insider. Вместо квартиры, свадьбы или пенсии люди теперь собирают себе «фонд выгорания». Это отдельная финансовая подушка на случай, если работа окончательно добьёт и придётся увольняться без нового оффера. Деньги должны покрыть несколько месяцев жизни, пока человек отдыхает и ищет новое место. Финансовая грамотность теперь выглядит как-то так 🙂 @…
😭84👍30😁12🔥9👏8
Wildberries вернулся в App Store — приложение снова можно установить из США. Тряска отменяется. @techmedia
😁122🔥28👏20👍14🤯3
⚡️ Вышел Grok 4.6 — Илон Маск выпустил новую флагманскую нейронку, которая уже бодро конкурирует с Fable 5 Max и GPT-5.6 Sol Max 😱 Главное улучшение — модель заметно лучше пишет код, выполняет сложные задачи в несколько шагов и увереннее работает как ИИ-агент. По общему уровню интеллекта она уже вплотную подобралась к топовым моделям конкурентов. При этом версия не стала дороже. Тестим здесь. @techmedia
👍29🔥25😁12🤯6😭3🫡1
❗️Wildberries удалили из App Store — но пока только в США. Похожая ситуация была с приложением Яндекс Пэй перед удалением из российского магазина. Если у вас ещё не установлены необходимые отечественные сервисы — запасайтесь 😩 UPD: Приложение в США снова доступно в App Store, сообщили в пресс-службе. @techmedia
👏97😁54🔥24😭13👍4
Водителям Подмосковья начали массово приходить штрафы ПЯТИЛЕТНЕЙ давности — на Госуслугах всплывают постановления до 3000 рублей за нарушения ещё 2021 года, пишет Baza. При этом в квитанциях часто нет ни фото, ни места нарушения, а срок давности истёк ещё в 2023-м. Обжаловать штраф через Госуслуги тоже нельзя: кнопки просто нет. В ГИБДД советуют ехать в отделение лично и брать чек, если штраф уже успели оплатить. …
🤯96😭47🫡24😁14🔥9👍4
За просмотр ИИ-порно будут сажать в тюрьму на СЕМЬ ЛЕТ — такой законопроект предложили ввести в Южной Корее. При этом наказывать хотят не только за создание, но и хранение, распространение и даже просмотр. Законопроект создан для защиты жертв, лица которых используют для дипфейков — сейчас за подобное наказания в стране нет. Вайб-зэки, наконец-то. @techmedia
👍112🤯75😁32👏15🔥7
Кризис топлива добрался до суперкаров — в рилсах показали первую в мире ИИ-Ferrari, которая ездит на газу. Без мам, пап, кредитов и бензина. @techmedia
😁144🤯25👍19👏9🔥7🫡4
В Кемеровской области 36-летний геймер 8 лет прятался от полицейских в ДИВАНЕ — его задержали в 2018 году за наркотики, но тот скрылся от суда. Всё это время он не выходил из дома и играл в компьютер, а когда приезжала полиция, залезал внутрь дивана — мама говорила, что дома он не появляется. В итоге схема провалилась из-за игрулек: он зарабатывал на играх по 30-40 тыс. рублей в месяц и из-за этого попался под руку…
😁217🤯37👍20👏7🔥4
⚡️Ozon Банк удален из Google Play — следом приложение может пропасть из App Store. Страшно… @techmedia
🤯146😁63😭28👏10🔥9🫡4
Showing the 12 most recent of 4,241 posts we hold for @techmedia. 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.
@techmedia edited 3 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
Citation-graph rank — 19,699 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.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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 71 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. The 24 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
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.
@techmedia named 7 handles that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all.A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s.When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 8 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
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 65 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
212 domainsthis channel’s own posts have linked to, measured by scanning the post bodies themselves — not the channel’s description, which is the separate Declared links section below when this entry has one. Appearing here is not a claim about who runs the linked site or why the channel linked to it; an advertisement, a news citation and a malicious link all leave the same kind of row.
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.
“в IT и выйти” (@techmedia), 1,352,710 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/techmedia.
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.