25 measurements spanning 29 days, net -35. 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 10,688–10,733 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 25
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
5 Sept 2026, 05:15
10,693
-6
3 Sept 2026, 12:59
10,699
-7
2 Sept 2026, 08:45
10,706
-10
1 Sept 2026, 08:53
10,716
-5
31 Aug 2026, 07:52
10,721
+2
30 Aug 2026, 07:56
10,719
-4
29 Aug 2026, 09:53
10,723
+4
28 Aug 2026, 07:37
10,719
+2
27 Aug 2026, 05:13
10,717
+3
26 Aug 2026, 07:25
10,714
-5
25 Aug 2026, 05:29
10,719
+2
22 Aug 2026, 13:48
10,717
+1
21 Aug 2026, 04:38
10,716
-7
20 Aug 2026, 01:58
10,723
+3
18 Aug 2026, 23:42
10,720
-2
17 Aug 2026, 22:45
10,722
-3
16 Aug 2026, 21:54
10,725
+6
15 Aug 2026, 13:25
10,719
+7
12 Aug 2026, 22:13
10,712
-4
11 Aug 2026, 23:42
10,716
first reading
Engagement
66 posts held, back to 3 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 39 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
10.5%
avg views ÷ 10,693 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,120
40 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.27%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
46
of 66 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 39 of 40 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 1 September 2026
Posts held
66 (3 August 2026 – 1 September 2026)
Views total
44,901
Reactions total
558
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
1 Sept 2026, 20:26 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.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
48s
Average length
16s
Measured directly from 3 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.
Reaction mix
835 reactions across 56 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 73.5% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
614
73.5%
👍
71
8.50%
🔥
68
8.14%
🥰
25
2.99%
🤝
23
2.75%
💘
14
1.68%
💊
7
0.838%
💅
5
0.599%
👌
4
0.479%
👏
4
0.479%
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 58 of the 66 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 835 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 66 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 1 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.
Так як у нас сьогодні день просто поговорити, наніч підкину вам таке питання - що ви думаєте про майбутнє інтерфейсів в ШІ еру?
Багато де зустрічала думку, що ніяких більше сайтів, додатків, кнопок і форм. Лише чат, агенти, які спілкуються між собою, і флюід UI, який чат вайбкодить під конкретну задачу конкретного користувача.
Що думаєте? Як швидко ми до цього дійдемо і чи дійдемо взагалі? І де в цьому всьому роль…
Коментар під минулим постом наштовхнув на думку, що потрібно ще трохи поговорити про те, чому я не дуже переживаю, що дизайнери стануть не потрібні.
ШІ зробив генерацію дуже дешевою. Навайбкодити 20 варіантів інтерфейсу, нагенерувати купу компонентів, фіч, екранів і цілий продукт тепер взагалі не проблема. Проблема в тому, що більша частина цього буде ШІ-слопом.
І хтось все ще має зрозуміти, що з цього взагалі має …
так, бачу у нас тут більшість ші-етузіастів і багато хто вже прейшов зі статичної фігма в код. Що дуже круто. Завтра з вами попрактикуємось. Я покажу, як я працюю і дуже хочу послухати, як працюєте ви.
А сьогодні давайте поговоримо про майбутнє нашої з вами професії та, в принципі, інтерфейсів (це в наступному пості).
Все, що буде сказано далі моя субʼєктивна думка. На істину не претендую, і мені дуже цікаво послух…
Отож, що очікувати цього тижня?
Знаю, багато хто на цьому місці питає, про що вам було б цікаво послухати.
Але я цього робити не буду, бо я сюди прийшла говорити про те, що цікаво мені. Авторитаризм, вибачайте с:
Говорити ми з вами будемо про ШІ.
Так, ви вже від нього втомилися, я знаю.
З кожної шпарини на нас летить купа інформації, нових тулів і чергових «THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING!!!!».
За цим тупо неможливо всти…
До речі, якщо ви вже сходили в мій LinkedIn і здивувались, чому після 8 років карʼєри там перекотиполе, то я теж цьому дивуюсь 😂
Я дуже не люблю вести власні соцмережі й роками успішно цього уникаю, як бачите.
Але від можливості на тиждень захопити чужі відмовлятися не стала.
Тож це маленький експеримент.
Подивимось, що з цього вийде с:
Прииивіт с:
Після такого представлення мені залишається тільки прийти й зіпсувати картинку успішного успіху 😌
Я багато років працювала дизайнеркою. Дуже багато працювала. Дуже любила свою професію, росла, менеджила та навчала інших дизайнерів, організовувала всяке і загалом робила все те, що треба робити для красивого карʼєрного шляху. Вважала, що працювати ввечері та на вихідних - це шлях самурая і взагалі дуже вес…
Спільното, вітайте Олену Внотченко — Product Designer та викладачку з понад 8 роками досвіду в дизайні.
На аутсорсі встигла попрацювати з дуже різними продуктами та сферами — від авіації, логістики й e-commerce до фінансів та освіти, проєктуючи для web, mobile, desktop і навіть TV.
5 років працювала в EPAM, з них 2,5 — над продуктами для однієї з найбільших світових Big Tech-компаній.
В EPAM долучалася до розвитку…
Перед тим, як представити нову кураторку цього тижня, нагадаємо, які курси у нас розпочинаються в першій половині вересня 🤝
User Psychology in Product — перетворіть психологію користувачів на постійний ресурс для покращення продукту.
AI for Product Designers — від ресерчу і персон до прототипу, UX-текстів і вайбкодингу.
Growth Design — проєктуйте рішення, що підвищують activation, retention і revenue.
AI for Prod…
До початку вересня у нас діє акція Back to Skills. Особливо актуальна для всіх, хто ловить FOMO щоразу, як відкриває лінкедин.
Цього разу пропонуємо прокачувати не тільки скіли для своєї спеціальності, а й те, що допомагає будувати кар’єру.
Career Booster — це 8 живих вебінарів щосуботи з 17 жовтня до 5 грудня.
На кожному вебінарі — конкретний інструмент, який можна одразу забрати собі в роботу:
• кар’єрна стратег…
❤4👍1
Showing the 12 most recent of 66 posts we hold for @interfaces_prjctr. 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.
Polls
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.
The shares total 109%, 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 66 most recent posts we hold, published 3 August 2026 to 1 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.
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 1 registered channel — 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.
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.
MyCheapTrip – подорожі @mycheaptrip_ua · 32,591 Telegram ranks this channel #28 of 67 here — alongside 66 others — read 5 September 2026
goodjob @findyourgoodjob · 44,156 Telegram ranks this channel #35 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 28 August 2026
This channel appears in 2 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists 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 5 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“interfaces.prjctr | vnotchenko week” (@interfaces_prjctr), 10,693 subscribers as measured 5 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/interfaces_prjctr.
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.