GitHub 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:

• 
  AGTP (@AGTPinsights) reported 1 minute ago

  ChatGPT just expanded automation with website logins and app triggers today. Here's what you need to know. ChatGPT Work can now sign into password-protected websites on web and mobile, without OpenAI ever seeing your username or password. You can ask it to set up utilities for a new apartment, book a DMV or passport appointment, or check a reimbursement, basically anything you'd normally click through a browser yourself. OpenAI says the earlier version of this required a manual takeover step, where you logged in yourself inside a virtual browser and screenshots were disabled during that window. The new rollout brings direct sign-in support to both the web and cloud browser, still without exposing credentials to the model. Scheduled tasks also got an upgrade. Plus and Pro users can now set tasks to trigger off events in Slack, Gmail, and GitHub, like a new email or a pull request update, instead of only running on a fixed schedule. Free users are getting scheduled tasks for the first time too, capped at three tasks each. Users can also now share their favorite tasks for others to customize and use. Key numbers: - Free users: up to 3 scheduled tasks - Plus and Pro: event-triggered tasks on Slack, Gmail, GitHub - Login feature: rolling out today for Plus, Pro, and Business on web and mobile Both features are live now, and OpenAI says credentials are never seen or stored by ChatGPT.

• 
  Suraj Jha (@surajtwt_) reported 2 minutes ago

  💻 Developers debugging in 2012: • Read the error • Google it • Stack Overflow • Copy solution • Done 💻 Developers debugging in 2026: • Read the error • Ask ChatGPT • Ask Claude • Ask Gemini • Check GitHub issues • Check Reddit • Read the docs • Read the source code • Ask Cursor • Ask Copilot • Realize the AI hallucinated • Finally read the error

• 
  Abdulfatai | Blockradar (@iamnotstatic) reported 7 minutes ago

  @snowthetechie @judicodes works with any *** server, or none at all. tracking is just local *** commands, it never talks to a host. github is only the sign-in for the optional leaderboard. private gitlab / gitea / bare ssh remotes all fine

• 
  Martin (@martinmalindacz) reported 13 minutes ago

  @michaelbushe 🙏 similar story here, i had the need, searched github, found the original signboard but found it had some extra features i didnt need and also several ux issues id send a PR to improve the original but it was vanilla js vibecode so i forked instead

• 
  It's FOSS (@Itsfoss) reported 14 minutes ago

  Open source maintainers are complaining about a new kind of harassment: AI-generated spam at scale. The QEMU virtualization project was hit hard when a single user filed 132 bug reports in under 10 minutes. Many were created seconds apart, none followed the bug report template, and not one showed any sign of human analysis or a proposed fix. Just raw AI output dumped into the tracker. Red Hat's Daniel Berrangé, who maintains QEMU, called it "a denial-of-service attack on maintainers". "Reports ignored the bug template and showed no sign of any human analysis," he wrote, pushing him to call on GitLab to implement rate limiting for non-members. This is not an isolated event. Maintainers across GitHub and GitLab are describing the same pattern: AI tools make it so cheap to generate and submit that bad-faith or careless users can flood a project with junk in minutes. The people on the receiving end are mostly unpaid volunteers working to maintain open source projects in their spare time. Some projects are now shutting down outside contributions entirely. Others are updating their contributor agreements to require human-written attestations. GitHub is reportedly building emergency tools to help. In the meantime, maintainers can do nothing but complain.

• 
  Clinton 💙📉✨ (@AkparantaN) reported 15 minutes ago

  @Zun2025 @flop_labs @CryptoHayes Should I login my GitHub first before carrying out the operation

• 
  chaos (@konig0000) reported 15 minutes ago

  Developers debugging in 2012: • Read the error • Google it • Stack Overflow • Copy solution • Done 💻 Developers debugging in 2026: • Read the error • Ask ChatGPT • Ask Claude • Ask Gemini • Check GitHub issues • Check Reddit • Read the docs • Read the source code • Ask Cursor • Ask Copilot • Realize the AI hallucinated

• 
  Buchi Reddy B (@buchireddy) reported 16 minutes ago

  Everyone's optimizing the inner loop. How fast can an agent write code? We spent the last six months at @LevoIncHQ on the outer loop instead. Everything that happens between an agent opening a PR and that feature being ready for the end users. That's where our time was actually going. Originally built on @aoagents, every ticket gets its own agent, its own *** worktree, its own branch, its own PR, so they run in parallel without stepping on each other. A lifecycle worker polls every session and routes whatever happens back to the agent that caused it. CI fails, the agent gets the logs. Reviewer asks for changes, the agent gets the comments. Merge conflict, the agent resolves it. Approved and green, it merges itself. Something breaks in dev, it opens a new PR to fix it. New vulns show up, same thing. Humans get pulled in when there's an actual judgment call, not to shuttle messages between GitHub and a terminal. Median over the last 30 days: 24 minutes from ticket to open PR, then 3 hours from PR open to merged. Two separate medians; they don't add. And that second one means reviewed, CI green, merged to main. Speed is the obvious part. The quality argument took me longer to appreciate. The loop only closes on green CI and a real approval, so an agent can't skip a test, disable a check, or merge its way out of anything. Turns out the autonomy and the quality bar are the same mechanism. Which is why these hold up. 91.4% of agent PRs merge. 0.6% escalation rate, down from 3.6% a month ago. 99.4% of sessions ran start to finish with no human touching them, and the merge rate didn't budge while that happened. The number I actually care about is $84.55 per merged PR. Not lines of code, not percentage of PRs written by AI; those are inputs. A merged, reviewed, CI-green pull request costs us less than an hour of engineer time. Not all of it is going the right direction. Cost per merged PR went up 41% this month because sessions are re-reading way too much context on every turn. That's what we're fixing next. Hard to fix what you're not measuring.

• 
  Spicer Matthews (@spicermatthews) reported 17 minutes ago

  @el_beeper @namespacelabs More github runners. My bill was $1000+ a month. In $1000 in broken laptops I saved $12,000 a year

• 
  Graham Christensen (@grhmc) reported 17 minutes ago

  FYI: GitHub Actions is experiencing an outage, but their status page doesn't know it yet. Specifically, in fetching JWTs from their identity service.

• 
  ivan-hc (@Ivan160286Hc) reported 17 minutes ago

  @EvilSoftGames Hi, I'd slowed down my release/snapshot rate to one GitHub action per month because the project had slowed down. I'm not actively following the Bottles project, but thanks to your comment, I just noticed that my AppImage is several versions behind.

• 
  Who is Peart? (@ThePeart) reported 17 minutes ago

  Just read @poteto's "How I Use Cursor" piece. A few takeaways about Benny, and a few things I'm still curious about. Takeaways 1. "Benny" isn't a bot, it's a whole pipeline wearing one name. Triage agent, then orchestrator, then subplanners, then verifier workers. The persona hides an org chart, which is probably the point: people talk to a colleague, not a system. 2. The real product isn't the fix, it's the evidence. Repro before code. CPU traces and heap snapshots for perf. Before/after video on the PR. That moves the human's job from reading diffs to auditing proof. 3. Triage is treated as the bottleneck, not fixing. Pulling *** history for regressions, Slack for duplicates, Notion for design intent (is this a bug or is it spec?) is the expensive part. Implies most agent failure is under-specification, not weak models. 4. Computer use closes the loop for a desktop app testing itself. Cursor driving Cursor in the cloud is a very small circle and a strong dogfooding argument. 5. Skills are the substrate. Benny inherits the same pstack skills a human uses, so the capability layer is portable between person and bot. That reframes what open-sourcing pstack is actually for. 6. Living in Slack means zero adoption cost. Feedback already happens there, so the factory installs itself at the source. Questions 1. What's the actual repro rate? For reports Benny can't reproduce, what happens: auto close, escalate, or ask again? 2. What's the merge rate on Benny PRs, and how often does verification pass but a human still rejects it? 3. How do you catch a fix that treats the symptom? Verification green, root cause untouched. 4. Which bug classes work and which don't? Perf and UI layout feel tractable. Races, flakes, and platform specific bugs feel brutal. 5. How do you keep computer use automation stable when the UI it's clicking changes every release? 6. What's the cost and wall clock time per ticket end to end, and where's the break even against a human doing triage? 7. Does report quality actually improve when a bot interviews the reporter, or do people ghost it? 8. Why the name and the avatar? Did anthropomorphizing measurably change how people engage? 9. What's still stubbornly human in the loop, and what's the next piece you'd automate? 10. Is the Benny pack usable outside Cursor's stack, for example GitHub Issues instead of Slack?

• 
  Gabriel Rubens (@gabrielrubenss) reported 18 minutes ago

  VPS deploy via GitHub (3/8): I blamed fail2ban, then the firewall, then the server itself. All three wrong. One runner could not reach the box for ten minutes, while the next runner connected on its first try 35 seconds later. Nothing inside my server behaves like that.

• 
  Livsun (@L1vsun) reported 23 minutes ago

  setup hedge funds use to cover 3,000 names a night just got replicated for $200 a month six Grok Bot Agents, six lanes, one brief sitting in your inbox at 5:30am before any human is awake what that desk costs at a real firm: > bloomberg terminal: $27k a year > two junior analysts on overnight coverage: $160k > research platform licenses: $85k > compliance overhead: $40k total: $312,000 a year. Grok Bot swarm running same desk: $2,400 Check Prompt on my Github in Bio each agent gets its own cloud computer, its own browser, its own logins - and they all write into the same vault: > FILINGS reads every 10-K on a 100-ticker watchlist overnight, flags going concern language and auditor changes > EARNINGS reads the call transcript within 24 hours and catches when CFO went quieter than last quarter > INSIDER catches Form 4 buys over $1M same day 13Fs land > FLOW reads sweeps and 0dte pressure before open > MACRO covers asia handover so you don't have to be awake for it > CHIEF reads the other five at 5:30am, drops anything only one flagged, emails ranked brief at 6 no vps, no code. show it the job once while it watches - it never asks you again morning brief is waiting. you're not in it Wall Street priced an entire industry on reading being slow and people being expensive both of those stopped being true this month save this - every research floor still running junior analysts on overnight filings is about to have a very bad quarter

• 
  Panta (@thepanta82) reported 25 minutes ago

  Using GitHub is such a miserable experience. Slow, fiddly, I can never find anything, keep having to bring up my 2FA thing... My local gitlab instance is way more pleasant to use, even if its UI isn't great either.