Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Токсичная цифра

@toxic_digital

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

4,371subscribers

+4 since we began measuring on 5 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001720613353
TypeChannel
Username@toxic_digital
Created17 January 2023measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held5
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/toxic_digital

Growth

4,3664,3714,368.55 August 2026 — 4,367 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,367 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,366 subscribers8 August 2026 — 4,369 subscribers12 August 2026 — 4,371 subscribers5 August 202612 August 2026
5 measurements spanning 6 days, net +4. 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 4,365–4,372 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 03:254,371+2
8 Aug 2026, 23:014,369+3
6 Aug 2026, 05:204,366-1
6 Aug 2026, 04:054,367no change
5 Aug 2026, 23:264,367first reading

Engagement

18 posts held, back to 26 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 6 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
26.1%
avg views ÷ 4,371 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,140
18 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.01%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
18
of 18 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. It is computed over the 17 of 18 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026
Posts held18 (26 July 20267 August 2026)
Views total20,569
Reactions total195
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken8 Aug 2026, 18:18 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

195 reactions across 16 posts, in 13 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 29.2% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
🤡5729.2%
3115.9%
👎2311.8%
👍2211.3%
🔥2110.8%
🤬136.67%
😁115.64%
👏42.05%
💩42.05%
😍42.05%
😱21.03%
🤯21.03%
🤔10.513%

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 17 of the 18 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 195reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 18 most recent posts we hold, published 26 July 2026 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.

Recent posts

7 Aug 2026, 12:00 UTC500 views6 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Photo

Т-Банк выкатил ИИ-сотрудника Афанасия Иванова для работы с клиентами. Это вполне логичная эволюция классических чат-ботов, которая поможет оптимизировать работу поддержки и высвободит человеческий ресурс для решения более сложных запросов, которые требуют оперативных ответов. Заявлено, что ИИ имеет доступ к тем же внутренним системам, что и живые сотрудники. То есть ИИ может посмотреть выписку, проверить тариф или н

👍4🔥2

6 Aug 2026, 13:00 UTC642 views25 reactionsread 8 August 2026

И снова про импортозамес. С импортозамещением есть одна довольно простая проблема: российский ИТ-ландшафт уже собран из большого количества разных компонентов. И заменить все сразу на один стек, понятное дело, никто не будет. Поэтому совместимость становится едва ли не важнее самого факта наличия отечественного продукта. «Лукоморье» подтвердило совместимость пяти своих решений с отечественной СУБД «Квант-Гибрид» ра

👍6🔥5💩4😍4🤡3👎21

6 Aug 2026, 12:25 UTC567 views17 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @CyberSachok

— Ватсон, а что там за вой в Рунете? — TLS-сертификаты, сэр Каждый раз, когда всплывает тема национальных сертификатов, в комментах оживает один и тот же тезис: раз банки перешли на сертификаты НУЦ, — значит, государство теперь видит весь трафик. А Яндекс Браузер, который поддерживает нацсертификаты по дефолту — вообще все им сливает. Разбираю, что тут технически неграмотная страшилка, а что — реальный, но управляем

5👏3🤡3😁3👍2🤔1

4 Aug 2026, 13:29 UTC≈1,160 views20 reactionsread 8 August 2026

По сертификатам для сайтов банков и прочих сервисов. Иноагентские СМИ весьма ловко передергивают ситуацию, подавая это так, что банки ни с того, ни с сего начали переходить на российские сертификаты, которые не воспринимают иностранные браузеры, такие как Chrome или Safari. Ну и дальше мутная телега про «небезопасность». При этом подразумевается, что сертификаты GlobalSign или Хареки безопасны, что называется «из к

🤡13👎3👍21👏1

3 Aug 2026, 17:52 UTC≈1,020 views3 reactionsread 8 August 2026

Самозапрет на регистрацию ИП и самозанятости и решение проблем сертификатов, которые сейчас отзывают буквально на потоке - одни из немногих тем, затронутых в интервью Сергея Боярского - главы ИТ-комитета Госдумы. А еще обсудили нейровыдачу, искусственный интеллект, защиту сми и многое другое. Подвели, так сказать, итог работе созыва.

👍21

3 Aug 2026, 13:45 UTC≈1,200 views8 reactionsread 8 August 2026

Минцифры предложило новый порядок выбора ИИ-помощников на устройствах О чем речь? Речь о предустановке ПО на устройства. Предлагается заменить категорию "голосовой помощник" на более широкое понятие "системный помощник". Согласно документу, при первом запуске гаджета владелец сможет выбрать такого помощника из перечня отечественных и иностранных решений либо вовсе отказаться от его установки. В Минцифры объяснили,

🤡6🔥2

2 Aug 2026, 15:59 UTC≈1,220 views7 reactionsread 8 August 2026

Неожиданный материал в РГ. Коллега Полынский пообщался с Андреем Зарениным. Насколько я понимаю, это первое и единственное интервью Андрея после его ухода добровольцем с поста замглавы Минцифры.

🔥5🤯2

31 Jul 2026, 15:20 UTC≈1,270 views5 reactionsread 8 August 2026

Про 5G говорится очень много и в последнее время фокус смещается в сторону b2b-применений, что очень здраво. Павел Бахтеяров, руководитель центра промышленной связи и отраслевой архитектуры МТС, написал по этому поводу колонку для издания Форбес. Что мы узнали из колонки г-на Бахтеярова? Сегодня уже очевидно, что value сетей пятого поколения для обычных пользователей весьма умозрительны. Иное дело бизнес, там есть

👍2🤡21

31 Jul 2026, 12:39 UTC≈1,020 views1 reactionsread 8 August 2026

Неожиданно подвезли обновление ЭПР для роверов. Весьма занятный документ разработали в Минэке. Много важных рутинных вещей прописаны. Из яркого - запрет на выезд на перекрестки с регулировщиками. Не буду постить тут видео, которое подсветило эту проблему в первый раз. Тем не менее, грустно, что в итоге был избран наименее технологичный вариант решения. Впрочем понятно, что компромисс там был максимально сложным.

👍1

30 Jul 2026, 15:20 UTC≈1,230 views15 reactionsread 8 August 2026

Мне лично интереснее судьба бренда и издания «Код Дурова»(признан террористом и экстремистом). Будет ли ребрендинг? Станет ли издание Кодом дедушки Дурова (Уголком Дурова?)

😁64🤡2😱2🔥1

30 Jul 2026, 15:15 UTC≈1,210 viewsread 8 August 2026

Давайте суммируем известное. Павел Дуров признан экстремистом и террористом. Это означает, что ему запрещается взаимодействовать со СМИ, распространять информацию в интернете, организовывать публичные мероприятия, участвовать в выборах, а также пользоваться большинством финансовых услуг. В общем, если занимали у него деньги, можете не возвращать. При этом на Telegram (юрлицо) все это не распространяется до момент

30 Jul 2026, 12:13 UTC≈1,110 views0 reactionsread 8 August 2026

Вы находитесь вот здесь И будет ли принято решение затем о признании Telegram экстремистской платформой со всеми вытекающими из этого последствиями?

Showing the 12 most recent of 18 posts we hold for @toxic_digital. 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

Citation-graph rank — 25,120 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.

Forward network

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.

Mentions

Named by 14 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.

Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels

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.

Минцифры России
@mintsifry · 237,659
Telegram ranks this channel #68 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 11 August 2026

This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.

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.

“Токсичная цифра” (@toxic_digital), 4,371 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/toxic_digital.

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.