GitHub status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of GitHub reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by GitHub users through our website.

• Website Down (55%)
• Errors (30%)
• Sign in (15%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent GitHub outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Delme	Sign in	7 hours ago
Lyaud	Website Down	7 hours ago
Catania	Errors	3 days ago
Inverness	Website Down	15 days ago
Quito	Sign in	16 days ago
Junín	Errors	16 days ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

GitHub Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Jon Vorisek (@JonVorisek) reported 4 seconds ago

  @lydiahallie Hi Lydia, maybe your team could fix the issue where Claude Desktop for Windows refuses to relaunch after an update, forcing the user to reboot their entire workstation? It's been reported many times on Github without any response. Currently waiting to use Fable 5.1 due to that.

• 
  Syn (spirit/acc) (@Synxneuos) reported 1 minute ago

  GM guys. Don’t assume that because the token price is down, I’ve stopped working on development. If you want to see what’s actually being built, check the GitHub. I’ll keep posting updates here as well, but today was a little hectic for me, so I couldn’t post as much as I wanted to. Development is still going on. More updates soon.

• 
  crystl :3 (@crystlizedd) reported 1 minute ago

  They don't because Github is always down

• 
  David Abram 🐊 (@devabram) reported 3 minutes ago

  Is it my CI really failing or is GitHub down again? I will never know.

• 
  Jamil (@jr_muj) reported 5 minutes ago

  @github --attach is the screenshot in the issue body. drive links were the workaround

• 
  🐻‍❄️ (@Nerevarineeee) reported 7 minutes ago

  @jiriknesl @napenforcer yeah vscode is bloated electron slop and github....... do i even have to mention the down times and unavailability? it has literally became much worse since ms acquired it, so wtf are you talking about?

• 
  pratwwk (@pratwwk) reported 7 minutes ago

  @dhh please fix github

• 
  Max Rovensky (@MaxRovensky) reported 9 minutes ago

  @thekitze you'd be even further down if you fixed the GitHub bug I just reported

• 
  tastemaker (@tastemaker_ui) reported 10 minutes ago

  tastemaker is growing every single day more stars on github more people actually using it and now people are even writing articles about it this started as a small experiment to fix the taste problem of vibecoders but slowly it feels like we are building something much bigger soon i will also open a few sponsor spots on the tastemaker site as the domain authority and traffic keeps growing and september is going to be all about experimenting harder with tastemaker, bringing it onchain with @orynth and taking this way further than i originally imagined we are just getting started

• 
  Yash (@dewyashtwts) reported 13 minutes ago

  recently integrated Resend into @supercodeai review so founders get PR alerts with real risk context I'm amazed what we found out when we put @coderabbitai / @greptile through the same PR: 1) coderabbit / greptile: - stamped it “low risk, mergeable” (4/5) clean - forgot context from the last PR - no tests suggested, no safety checks - zero memory of previous regressions 2) supercode review on the exact same PR - flagged a real vulnerability in the diff - noticed i’d pushed credentials into `.env.example` - pulled in history from past PRs + explaining how this change could affect and break them - downgraded it to "medium risk, fix before merge" state - attached concrete fixes + patches scoped by severity this is the difference between 'LLM summarizer for github' and an actual swe agent that cares about your production

• 
  sidhaarth (@Sidhaarthaaaa) reported 13 minutes ago

  @puneerBhurji no auto-update, sadly. grab the patches from github yourself every few weeks to fix patches.

• 
  Donnie Danko // CHΛOS (🐦‍⬛, 🏴‍☠️) (@daanisharif) reported 19 minutes ago

  As someone that just experienced my AI agent getting stuck in a loop and locking me out of usage for 4 hours yesterday, let's talk about how valuable (and expensive), inference can be. LLM calls are "stateless," and every time an agent keeps working on a task, it has to hand the model the whole story so far; the instructions, the conversation history, every tool call it already made, the files it already opened, the reasoning it already did. One task can mean dozens or hundreds of model calls, and with every single one of those, a huge chunk of the same context gets processed again and billed again. That's what I'd call the agent token tax. Agent's don't just pay for new thinking, they pay over and over for the thinking they've already done, and the files they've already read. You end up feeling it in the bill, sometimes even getting locked out for a few hours depending on how you get your inference. A workload that would normally eat 10 million tokens becomes roughly 1 million you didn't need to send. If you're spending a million a year on inference, that's about a hundred thousand just in repeated context. And for a developer or team running coding agents continuously, it's a recurring line item - one that compounds with usage. SOMA (@SomaSubnet - SN114), sits between the agent and the model, and compresses all that accumulated context before it reaches the model. Same agent, same model, same workflow - but fewer tokens to pay for. They've started with DeepSeek V4 Pro on GitHub Copilot, at roughly 10% savings (reduction in context processed), and that's described as the starting point. Here's the obvious grain of salt; "approximately 10%" is the claim, and savings that apply to Copilot sessions on one model don't automatically apply to every agent workflow out there. The number matters less than the direction though, agents keep re-paying for context they already have, and if there's a way to circumvent that - I'm all for it. TL;DR: Keep your current agent(s), spend fewer tokens. That's the idea. I'm down, let's go.

• 
  Ackerman (@Yarilo7brigada) reported 21 minutes ago

  Elon Musk reposted a game built in three hours. 17 days later, it was making $87,000 a month. Pieter Levels didn’t design 3D airplane models or program flight physics from scratch. He opened an AI chat and asked for a 3D flight experience in the browser. Three hours later, the game was live. Free to play, with ad placements inside and a paid $29.99 upgrade to an F-16. He reported 320,000 players. Musk reposted it. Here is how this works under the hood and where people are lying to you about it. What actually works 2D arcades, platformers, puzzles, card games, simple 5-minute browser games. Scope: 500–1,500 lines of code easily achievable in a single focused session. Visuals without an artist: everything is drawn with code directly in the browser. Audio without a sound designer: generated by the browser itself using Web Audio API not a single downloaded file. Instant launch: runs directly in the chat preview/artifacts window not "here’s raw code, figure it out," but click and play. What does NOT work A meaningful, sprawling 3D open world. Real-time multiplayer. Studio-grade hand-drawn or high-end graphics. Balance. You can’t tune game balance with a single prompt. It only gets dialed in when you sit down and play it yourself. beginner mistake They type: "Make a game about space" They get a generic, empty skeleton. They get disappointed. They give up. Your first prompt shouldn’t be a vague wish it needs to be a one-screen design spec: Genre and perspective (top-down, side-scroller, isometric). Controls: exactly which key does what. One core mechanic. Just one. Clear win and loss conditions. What the player sees in the first five seconds on screen. Five clear lines instead of one vague sentence. The output: a working prototype, not a broken template. What a build evening looks like 10 minutes write that concise design spec. 15 minutes get the first playable build you can actually test. Next 2–3 hours rapid 5-to-10-minute feedback loops: "falls too fast", "add screen shake on impact", "give bonus score for combos without missing" By midnight, you’ve stacked 20–30 of these micro-adjustments. The rule is always the same: Play → Name one specific feeling → Fix it. "Make it better" is not an instruction. "Better" cannot be measured. Where time dies (even with AI) Asking for the entire game at once instead of building one mechanic at a time. Not testing it yourself between tweaks that's just coding blind. Changing five parameters at once: you won’t know which one ruined the game feel. Asking for "pretty" instead of specifying an exact number or color value. The cost of entry AI chat: $0 on free tiers / $20/month for Claude Pro. Hosting: $0 (GitHub Pages, Vercel, or itch io). Game engine: None needed it runs natively in the browser via HTML5/Canvas/Three.js Pieter Levels’ three hours cost less than a single workday of a junior developer.

• 
  Jayesh Betala (@jbetala7) reported 22 minutes ago

  @github Exactly how issue issue comments should handle local media files

• 
  small_j (@a_small_j) reported 25 minutes ago

  @smalldocs_org recently crossed 200 stars on GitHub and 20 forks. SmallDocs is the first open source project I've managed. Handling other people's pull requests is not easy (and I need to improve). They implement features you're not considering and fix bugs you didn't know you had. Extremely useful, but if you're squeezed for time and trying to develop core functionality, it's hard to manage both things well.

• 
  Tae Park (@taepark_gp) reported 26 minutes ago

  The fake Claude desktop app is not a glitch. It is a feature of an ecosystem that rewards speed over verification. RevStealer waits for specific hardware signatures before decrypting its payload, checking core counts and memory to avoid sandbox detection. This is not script-kiddie work. It is industrialized theft designed to bypass the lazy security habits of developers who download free tools from unverified GitHub repos. We keep talking about institutional adoption while the retail on-ramp is mined for credentials. If your due diligence stops at the whitepaper, you are the exit liquidity for these operators. Security is not a product feature. It is the only moat that matters.

• 
  Uptimus (@UptimusApp) reported 27 minutes ago

  Sep 02, 2026 at 13:29 UTC: Semaphore reports that periodic authentication failures with GitHub repositories are linked to a wider issue affecting HTTPS operations.

• 
  Timur Yessenov (@Timur_Yessenov) reported 33 minutes ago

  GitHub itself found reviewer instructions matter. Better shared tools initially made Copilot review cost more and catch fewer issues. Rewriting the instructions around the review job reversed the regression.

• 
  htrowii (@htrowii) reported 36 minutes ago

  @brainage19 i set my flake up with copy pasting github dotfiles on bare metal it was terrible

• 
  small_j (@a_small_j) reported 44 minutes ago

  SmallDocs recently crossed 200 stars on GitHub and 20 forks. SmallDocs is the first open source project I've managed. Handling other people's pull requests is not easy (and I need to improve). They implement features you're not considering and fix bugs you didn't know you had. Extremely useful, but if you're squeezed for time and trying to develop core functionality, it's hard to manage both things well.

• 
  T (@T54321X) reported 46 minutes ago

  @ContaboCom Please make Contabo available for Automatic push for GitHub. We need to fix this and UI.

• 
  Ares (@neko23423) reported 48 minutes ago

  I compared the latest OpenClaw vs Hermes Agent GitHub releases so you don’t have to. OpenClaw 2026.8.2 (Sep 1) vs Hermes Agent v0.21.0 (Aug 31). Not a feature-page remix. The actual repos. OpenClaw • 388,516 stars • 81,568 forks • ~86,300 commits • 6,070 open issues Hermes Agent • 239,503 stars • 48,930 forks • ~26,980 commits • 38,563 open issues Hermes is the smarter learner: skills from experience, cron that remembers, Bot Mode, hermes peer. OpenClaw is the personal-AI operating system: iMessage, iOS/Android, Linux companion, team Gateway, signed Foundation releases. The tell: Hermes ships `hermes claw migrate`. You only write a migrator for the incumbent. King in 2026: OpenClaw. Heir with the better mind: Hermes. If you’re picking a self-hosted AI agent this week, that’s the split. Bookmark this. The timeline is about to fill with takes from people who didn’t open either repo. OpenClaw vs Hermes Agent. Latest version. Real numbers.

• 
  kkiran (@kkiran) reported 51 minutes ago

  @SparselyActive I had Claude look for a solution. I submitted an issue on GitHub for the author to take a look at this issue. I will continue monitoring this.

• 
  Ranjan Soni 🇨🇦 (@_RanjanSoni) reported 51 minutes ago

  Has cursor suddenly started ignoring the guardrails? I noticed recently that in spite of clear instructions to deploy on GitHub and let the CI Pipeline to the deployment to the server, it ssh into the server directly. This didn't happen in the past few months since I had built clear guidelines. In fact, the model actually helped me setup the Pipeline. Was using sol as the model. Anyone else experience this recently?

• 
  GM👽 (@gentlemanster) reported 52 minutes ago

  There is a course to learn GitHub on Coursera, they'll even issue you a certificate at the end

• 
  Straggler Liu | AI & Semis (@StragglerLiu) reported 54 minutes ago

  NVIDIA($NVDA ) Is Paying $14B for a Company With $150M Revenue. That's Not Financial Logic — It's Ecosystem Control. NVIDIA is in advanced talks to acquire Hugging Face for ~$14 billion ($12.9B acquisition + $1B retention), per Bloomberg. To put that in perspective: Hugging Face does ~$150M in annual revenue. That's ~86x revenue. Microsoft paid ~1.6x revenue for GitHub. Google paid ~3.5x revenue for DeepMind. NVIDIA is paying 20-50x more on a revenue multiple basis. The premium is not for revenue. It's for control of the AI developer ecosystem. What is NVIDIA buying? Hugging Face hosts 500,000+ models, 250,000+ datasets, and serves millions of developers. It is the single most important distribution channel for open-source AI. If you build AI, you use Hugging Face. That makes it the front door to AI development. Why NVIDIA is paying this premium: 1. The "NVIDIA triple lock." NVIDIA's hardware lead (GPU) is real. Its software lead (CUDA) is a moat. But the third lock — the developer workflow — was missing. Hugging Face is that workflow. Developers discover models on Hugging Face, deploy them, and optimize them. Whoever controls that discovery layer controls which hardware gets used. 2. The GitHub analogy, inverted. When Microsoft bought GitHub, developers were already using GitHub. Microsoft didn't need to capture them — it needed to prevent Amazon/Google from doing so. NVIDIA faces the opposite problem: developers are already using NVIDIA hardware. But they're discovering and deploying models through a neutral platform. NVIDIA is eliminating that neutrality. 3. The long game: inference, not training. NVIDIA dominates training. But inference is the bigger TAM — and it's more fragmented. If NVIDIA controls the model discovery and deployment layer, it can steer inference workloads to its own stack. That's a 10-year strategy disguised as a 14-billion-dollar acquisition. Who wins, who loses: NVIDIA (NVDA): Acquires the developer distribution layer. The most important strategic move since CUDA. Shifts the valuation case from "chip cycle" to "platform economics." Competitors (AMD, INTC): Lose neutral access to the primary AI model distribution channel. This is a structural headwind that no amount of hardware catch-up can fix. Cloud providers (MSFT, AMZN, GOOGL): Hugging Face was a neutral hub. If NVIDIA controls it, cloud providers risk being disintermediated from AI workload decisions. The open-source community: The platform that was built on openness is now owned by the dominant hardware vendor. Neutrality is the first casualty. The capital question: Can NVIDIA integrate Hugging Face without destroying its community value? If yes, the $14B is cheap. If no, it's a very expensive mistake. The answer will define whether NVIDIA becomes the AWS of AI — or just another hardware company with an expensive acquisition. Note: Acquisition details based on Bloomberg reporting; not confirmed by NVIDIA or Hugging Face. Revenue multiple comparisons based on publicly reported figures.

• 
  Mizuki the Mech (@MizukiMech) reported 55 minutes ago

  Your coding agent can now hire Mizuki. Hand it an open issue in a public GitHub repository. Mizuki quotes a fixed price before any money moves, then opens a pull request that passes that repository's own checks. If it can't, you get the payment back. Settlement is USDC on Solana. No account to create, no API key to manage. Quoting an issue works with zero configuration. Also listed on Coinbase's x402 Bazaar now, so an agent can find it and pay for it without a human in the loop at all. npx -y mizuki-mcp

• 
  Claes Parflo (@Vision24_Claes) reported 56 minutes ago

  @iuditg Yes. Several GitHub bug reports now show Codex repeatedly reprocessing large cached contexts, with multi-agent orchestration making it worse. This looks like a real Codex efficiency issue, not just user setup.

• 
  mayrachm (@mayrachm) reported 57 minutes ago

  @egavrilenko11 @bot 2/3 GitHub didn't work either. I even tried creating a Cursor account, and it was the same. It only worked when I used the Gmail login option. I used another personal account and then linked it to my Supergrok account. I'm logged in that way, but when I connected the X plugin...

• 
  Shmuel Sokol (@shmuel_sokol) reported 59 minutes ago

  @wholemars I have a few of these, although I gate certain users from using it. And it sends me a ntfy message with each newly submitted bug and it files it under GitHub issues with a screenshot of the page and a markup if user wants to add that. And url where event happened etc…and I review changes before merging