Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Interra | Школа профессий

Channel

Interra | Школа профессий

@interrabz

On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

7,857subscribers

-71 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

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

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001155113180
TypeChannel
Username@interrabz
CreatedBetween 1 December 2018 and 31 August 2022 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live15 September 2026
Measurements held15
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 15 September 2026
On Telegramt.me/interrabz

Topic

Education — 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 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 98% 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.

Observations

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.

Content that also appears on other registered channels

Posts published here appear word for word on 1 other registered channel. 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.

Matching posts — open both and compare (6 of the pairs behind the counts below)
Posted firstThenOverlapGap
@interra_ai/50520 Jun 2026, 06:11 UTC@interrabz/1968 · this entry20 Jun 2026, 06:44 UTC1.0033 minutes
@interra_ai/50621 Jun 2026, 06:37 UTC@interrabz/1969 · this entry21 Jun 2026, 06:46 UTC1.009 minutes
@interra_ai/50924 Jun 2026, 13:20 UTC@interrabz/1972 · this entry24 Jun 2026, 13:23 UTC1.002 minutes
@interra_ai/51025 Jun 2026, 06:03 UTC@interrabz/1973 · this entry25 Jun 2026, 06:04 UTC1.0072 seconds
@interra_ai/5161 Jul 2026, 06:30 UTC@interrabz/1979 · this entry1 Jul 2026, 06:30 UTC1.00under a minute
@interra_ai/5172 Jul 2026, 06:40 UTC@interrabz/1980 · this entry2 Jul 2026, 06:41 UTC1.0072 seconds
Every channel this entry shares post bodies with
ChannelMatching postsText overlapTypical gapPublished first
@interra_ai20 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed)1.0072 seconds@interra_ai (146)

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 14 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 21 comparable posts for this entry, running 19 June 2026 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.

  • Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
  • 'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
  • shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
  • Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).

Across the whole group of 2, the earliest publisher we hold is @interra_ai. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.

Recorded under the key clone_copy, 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.

Also posting the same content

This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, 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.

Growth

7,8577,9287,892.56 August 2026 — 7,928 subscribers6 August 2026 — 7,928 subscribers6 August 2026 — 7,925 subscribers9 August 2026 — 7,918 subscribers12 August 2026 — 7,909 subscribers16 August 2026 — 7,901 subscribers19 August 2026 — 7,895 subscribers22 August 2026 — 7,894 subscribers25 August 2026 — 7,889 subscribers27 August 2026 — 7,883 subscribers30 August 2026 — 7,880 subscribers2 September 2026 — 7,873 subscribers6 September 2026 — 7,868 subscribers11 September 2026 — 7,862 subscribers15 September 2026 — 7,857 subscribers6 August 202615 September 2026
15 measurements spanning 40 days, net -71. 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 7,846–7,939 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
15 Sept 2026, 12:577,857-5
11 Sept 2026, 17:377,862-6
6 Sept 2026, 17:417,868-5
2 Sept 2026, 07:357,873-7
30 Aug 2026, 13:447,880-3
27 Aug 2026, 19:277,883-6
25 Aug 2026, 04:377,889-5
22 Aug 2026, 11:557,894-1
19 Aug 2026, 12:077,895-6
16 Aug 2026, 03:247,901-8
12 Aug 2026, 20:187,909-9
9 Aug 2026, 20:337,918-7
6 Aug 2026, 23:027,925-3
6 Aug 2026, 18:157,928no change
6 Aug 2026, 18:097,928first reading

Engagement

42 posts held, back to 19 June 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 19 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
0.902%
avg views ÷ 7,857 subscribers
Avg views / post
70.9
8 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.35%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
8
of 42 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 3 of 8 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 28 August 2026
Posts held42 (19 June 202628 August 2026)
Views total567
Reactions total3
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken28 Aug 2026, 20:03 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

26 reactions across 17 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 61.5% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍1661.5%
623.1%
❤‍🔥311.5%
👎13.85%

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 42 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 26 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 42 most recent posts we hold, published 19 June 2026 to 28 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

28 Aug 2026, 06:51 UTC40 viewsread 28 August 2026

Синдром отличницы: почему сложно делегировать задачу даже роботу 📝Знакомая мысль: «легче сделать самой, чем объяснять». Она звучит как рациональный аргумент, но чаще всего это не про эффективность, а про глубоко засевшую установку — если я не проконтролирую каждую деталь лично, что-то обязательно пойдёт не так. Это тот самый синдром отличницы: привычка с детства делать всё сама и на «отлично», потому что так надёжне

27 Aug 2026, 06:46 UTC58 viewsread 28 August 2026

ИИ-агент vs чат-бот: когда что использовать? ✏️ Ранее мы писали чем агент отличается от чат-бота — если коротко, чат-бот отвечает, агент действует. Но на практике куда важнее другой вопрос: а что вообще нужно вашему проекту? Потому что ставить агента там, где хватило бы простого бота, — это как нанимать сотрудника на полный день ради задачи на 10 минут. Разберём на конкретных сценариях. 1️⃣ Консультации и ответы на

26 Aug 2026, 06:41 UTC69 views1 reactionsread 28 August 2026

5 признаков, что вы уже эксперт (даже если вам так не кажется) 🔍Часто экспертность воспринимается как какая-то финишная черта: вот выучу ещё одно, пройду ещё один курс, наберу ещё немного опыта — и тогда, может быть, буду иметь право себя так называть. Проблема в том, что эта черта постоянно отодвигается, и момент «я уже эксперт» так и не наступает — просто потому, что вы сами себе его не разрешаете. При этом со сто

👍1

25 Aug 2026, 06:02 UTC78 views1 reactionsread 28 August 2026

Как объяснить близким, чем вы на самом деле занимаетесь 👨‍👩‍👧«Ты же просто сидишь за компьютером» — фраза, которую слышал почти каждый, кто ушёл в удалёнку. Иногда с искренним непониманием, иногда с лёгким осуждением, иногда с прямым «может, найдёшь уже нормальную работу?». И дело не в том, что близкие хотят обидеть — просто у них нет модели, через которую можно это понять. В их картине мира работа — это когда есть н

👍1

24 Aug 2026, 07:21 UTC75 views1 reactionsread 28 August 2026

Почему “работать по ночам” не лучшая идея (и как в этом убедиться на себе) 🌙Среди тех, кто работает удалённо, довольно живуч миф: ночь — лучшее время для работы. Тишина, никто не отвлекает, телефон молчит, в чатах пусто. Кажется, что именно в такие часы получается сделать больше всего — и многие этим даже немного гордятся, считая ночной режим признаком дисциплины и вовлечённости. На деле чаще происходит обратное. П

👍1

23 Aug 2026, 07:14 UTC78 viewsread 28 August 2026

Дайджест недели: осознанные решения на каждом этапе За неделю говорили о том, как принимать решения без спешки: от выбора профессии до работы с клиентами. Собрали здесь: 🎯 Как не сравнивать свой путь в новой профессии с чужим Почему сравнение с чужим «днём сотым» тормозит прогресс сильнее, чем реальная сложность материала — и что сравнивать вместо этого. 📈 Какие профессии меняются быстрее всего из-за автоматизации Б

22 Aug 2026, 07:09 UTC81 viewsread 28 August 2026

Что делать, если клиент просит «бесплатный тест» «Сделайте небольшое тестовое задание, и если понравится — возьмём в работу». Фраза знакомая почти каждому, кто начинал на фрилансе. И вопрос здесь не «делать или нет», а как отличить нормальную практику отбора от банальной попытки получить бесплатную работу. Разница есть, и она вполне определяемая. Честный отбор обычно выглядит так: небольшая задача, которая занимает

21 Aug 2026, 07:05 UTC88 viewsread 28 August 2026

Как понять, что пора уходить с текущей работы в удалёнку 🚪Обычно решение уйти с офисной работы принимается не в один момент, а копится месяцами. Сначала кажется, что просто устал, потом — что просто не повезло с проектом, потом — что просто нужен отпуск. А по факту это может быть накопленным сигналом, который стоит воспринимать всерьёз. Разберём по конкретным маркерам, а не по общим ощущениям «что-то не так». 😫Физич

20 Aug 2026, 06:54 UTC83 viewsread 28 August 2026

Как читать длинный документ за 5 минут с помощью ИИ 📄Знакомая ситуация для фрилансера или удалёнщика: приходит договор на 15 страниц, ТЗ с десятком приложений или объёмный отчёт от клиента — и первая реакция не «интересно», а «когда я это всё успею прочитать». Обычно читают одним из двух способов: либо вдумчиво и целиком, теряя на этом час-два, либо по диагонали — и тогда риск упустить важный пункт про сроки оплаты

19 Aug 2026, 06:51 UTC88 viewsread 28 August 2026

Как проверить идею продукта, не тратя месяц на разработку 💡Классическая ошибка при запуске нового цифрового продукта — сразу садиться за полноценную разработку. Кажется логичным: чем раньше начать делать, тем раньше получится готовый результат. На практике часто получается наоборот — месяц (а то и несколько) уходит на продукт, который никому не нужен в том виде, в каком его задумали. Лучше все же сначала проверить г

18 Aug 2026, 06:17 UTC94 views2 reactionsread 28 August 2026

Какие профессии меняются быстрее всего из-за автоматизации 📈Тема, вокруг которой в последнее время много шума - и, честно говоря, много алармизма. Заголовки в духе «ИИ оставит миллионы без работы» цепляют внимание, но мало помогают понять, что реально происходит и что с этим делать. Разберём спокойно, по фактам. Быстрее всего автоматизация затрагивает роли с высокой долей рутинных, повторяющихся операций. По оценке

👍2

17 Aug 2026, 07:37 UTC90 viewsread 28 August 2026

Как не сравнивать свой путь в новой профессии с чужим 🎯Знакомая ситуация: только начинаешь разбираться в вайбкодинге или ИИ - и тут же натыкаешься на кого-то, кто уже собирает сложные проекты, показывает результаты, легко оперирует терминами. И вместо мотивации возникает обратный эффект: «наверное, это не моё» или «я слишком долго вникаю». Часто именно это сравнение тормозит прогресс сильнее, чем реальная сложность

Showing the 12 most recent of 42 posts we hold for @interrabz. 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.

Forward network

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.

Mentions

Named by 2 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.

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.

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 15 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Interra | Школа профессий” (@interrabz), 7,857 subscribers as measured 15 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/interrabz.

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.