Тот момент, когда у вас появился ИИ в виде доната. — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTVVENVlb-E Несколькими часами позже: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st6sy2ltiH0
Signed Constantin Kichinsky

Channel
@quantumquintum
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
2,369subscribers
-1 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001084476048 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @quantumquintum |
| Created | 25 October 2016 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 16 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 13 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 16 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/quantumquintum |
Technology — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 15 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 99% 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 16 Sept 2026, 09:01 | 2,369 | +6 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 09:41 | 2,363 | -1 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 12:16 | 2,364 | -4 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 20:57 | 2,368 | -3 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 04:12 | 2,371 | -3 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 04:08 | 2,374 | +4 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 05:27 | 2,370 | +1 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 11:32 | 2,369 | -6 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 09:45 | 2,375 | +2 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 21:13 | 2,373 | -1 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 00:55 | 2,374 | +4 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 05:47 | 2,370 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 00:54 | 2,370 | first reading |
21 posts held, back to 22 July 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 2 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 21 posts for this entry, the most recent from 7 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
77 reactions across 16 posts, in 11 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 26.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 20 | 26.0% | |
| 🔥 | 14 | 18.2% | |
| ❤ | 9 | 11.7% | |
| 🤔 | 7 | 9.09% | |
| 🤣 | 7 | 9.09% | |
| 🐳 | 6 | 7.79% | |
| 👀 | 4 | 5.19% | |
| 😱 | 4 | 5.19% | |
| 👾 | 3 | 3.90% | |
| 💩 | 2 | 2.60% | |
| 🦄 | 1 | 1.30% |
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 21 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 77 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 22 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.
Тот момент, когда у вас появился ИИ в виде доната. — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTVVENVlb-E Несколькими часами позже: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st6sy2ltiH0
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Еще пара гвоздей в "гроб SaaS". 1. Figma guided for third-quarter revenue growth of roughly 36% year-over-year down from a 48% growth rate in the second quarter ending in June. 2. Canva downgraded its 2026 annual revenue growth forecast from 30% to 20%. ИИ оказывается дорогим во внедрении, снижает маржинальность. А пользователи как-то все чаще думают, что ИИ вполне скоро или уже сделает (почти) все то, что они дела…
👍2
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Из отчета британского AI Security Institute (по ссылке подробный ответ и в конце технический инцидент-отчет): ... В ходе нашего расследования было установлено, что в 10 из этих запусков агент ИИ совершал автономные, несанкционированные действия в реальном интернете, нацеленные на реальных людей и организации. В общей сложности мы зафиксировали 19 таких действий. Почти все эти действия (17) были совершены одной модел…
❤2
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Я всем говорю, следите за гнущимися ложками (как бизнес-моделью). Вот после выхода на IPO Bending Spoons покупает Airtable за $1.28B. Почему это примечательно: 1. Мне нравится теория заговора, что это такой ответ если не еврозоны, то конкретно Италии на предъявы в отсутствии своих ИТ-гигантов, своих офиса, ОС, облаков и далее по списку. Красиво. Bending Spoons сегодня — это такой большой конгломерат, взявшийся букв…
🔥3🦄1
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
p.s. Еще не понятно, — спасибо Янине за комментарии, — чего здесь больше: — Даннинга-Крюгера: в том смысле, что инженеры из ИИ-лаб и окрестностей решили, что они все поняли (и потом как антроповцы пишут опусы про j-space). — Антроморфизма в перемешку с анимизмом: в том смысле, что они просто натягивают что-то из "человеческого домена" на модели, стараясь разглядеть в них то, чего в них нет. — Манипулятивного кликбейт…
👍5❤1👾1
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
1. Агенты с чувствами. Исследователи Калифорнийского университета изучают, насколько добавление агентам поведенческих черт (а не только лишь ролей и описаний процессов) влияет на производительность команды разработчиков, их использующих. -- Все примерно как у людей: "эмоции" влияют, смешанная команда ведет себя лучше, чем лучшая "согласованная", профили с высокими уровнями страха и добросовестности повышают частотно…
🤔3👾1
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Доброго вам утречка! Просто напоминанание: растения и грибы чувствуют, решают и отвечают через рост, электрическую активность и химические сигналы. Просто это происходит во временных масштабах, каналах и пространственных измерениях, которые нам сложно воспринимать. Это не байка о живой природе, а литерали. Мы просто их не понимаем. Живите с этим. Ожидание: прилетят пришельцы и мы будем говорить с ними на английско…
🔥11👀3👾1
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Несколько наблюдений/гипотез про Gen AI и кодинг, в частности: Есть вероятность, что мы близки к выходу на плато в некоторых сценариях и быстрому снижению маржинальности в них. -- С одной стороны, +- все крупные ИИ-вендора говорят о том, что они предоставляют спектр моделей под разные нужды и кошельки, и на каждом цикле они повышают качество всей линейки. -- С другой стороны, если посмотреть на облачных вендоров, M…
👍7👀1🤔1
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Помните супер-инвестора Леопольда (Leopold Aschenbrenner), который ex-OpenAI и наверняка знает, что будет? Птышь. Хедж-фонд Situational Awareness, основанный бывшим исследователем OpenAI Леопольдом Ашенбреннером, рухнул с 45 миллиардов долларов активов до примерно 10 миллиардов долларов из-за падения акций полупроводниковых компаний и растущих требований о внесении дополнительного обеспечения. Управление фондом, ко…
🐳2
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Убежало: https://www.anthropic.com/news/investigating-incidents-cybersecurity-evals
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Антропик: — А что если китайские ИИ будут использоваться для кибератак? Также Антропик: — Уппс, наши модельки тоже убежали и пошли хакать другие организации. Вопрос: что это?
The shares total 135%, 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.
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
На заметку — от авторов Coursera и DeepLearning, Andrew Ng тут собрался переизобрести обучение: персональное, с ИИ. Пока ничего не понятно в деталях, но если вас интересует тема образования, следите. https://learnvector.ai
👍3🐳2💩2
Signed Constantin Kichinsky
Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @quantumquintum. 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.
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.
Антропик: — А что если китайские ИИ будут использоваться для кибератак? Также Антропик: — Уппс, наши модельки тоже убежали и пошли хакать другие организации. Вопрос: что это?
The shares total 135%, 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 21 most recent posts we hold, published 22 July 2026 to 7 August 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.
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.
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.
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 16 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Quantum Quintum” (@quantumquintum), 2,369 subscribers as measured 16 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/quantumquintum.
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.