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:

• 
  zettelkasten (@zettelkastten) reported 2 minutes ago

  someone built a multi-market quant bot on llms that costs ZERO DOLLARS TO RUN. no server. no cloud bill. no api keys. i checked the workflow file to find the catch. 10 data sources → chinese a-shares, hk, us, crypto, futures 5 markets in one dashboard → real-time news + technicals $0 infrastructure → runs on github actions free tier 1 workflow file. 24/7 schedule. 100% free tier. the hard part of quant was never the model. it was the data plumbing. he swapped the pipes for llms and let microsoft foot the bill. i've been paying for terminals like they're electricity. the meter was optional. 10 sources. 5 markets. $0. microsoft pays.

• 
  Nestor Lab (@NestorLab44) reported 3 minutes ago

  Hermes just made a move that changes the game for everyone building agents. The announcement: Hermes now supports portable plugins using the Agent Plugins v1 standard, already adopted by Vercel, Cursor, OpenAI, and Microsoft. The idea is simple: create a plugin once and make it work across multiple agents. A portable plugin is just a folder with a plugin.json, a skills/ directory, and sometimes an mcp.json. It supports both Skills and MCPs. Before this, you couldn’t import these packages into Hermes. Only native plugins worked — more powerful, but locked to one tool. Take a concrete example with GitHub. Until now, setting up Hermes to interact with GitHub (list issues, review a PR, read commits) required manual configuration. Now a portable package handles the connection directly. And the exact same package also works on Cursor or Claude Code if you switch tools. The main benefit is interoperability. No more rewriting the same integrations for every agent. Hermes already supported MCPs through the config file. What’s new is the simplified installation as shareable packages. #hermes

• 
  BlackCat. (@BlackCatRobotix) reported 4 minutes ago

  Having some bug issues with GitHub connection, Hermes not only diagnosed, found the hang and built a skill to fix it.

• 
  Igor Stadnyk (🇺🇸,🇵🇹,🇺🇦) (@AIgorStadnyk) reported 6 minutes ago

  this week @OpenAI , @AnthropicAI and @GoogleDeepMind did what they've never done before they actually agreed on something🤯 they teamed up to warn everyone about two free ai models beating them on price: qwen 3.8 max and kimi k3. both chinese. wild coincidence same script every empire's run for a century: - 'it's not that we don't want them to have it, it's that we're worried about YOU having it' here's the part that IS true - open models often ARE worse. not a conspiracy, just math: best engineers already have jobs, their code belongs to some company, not github. opensource gets built by whoever's left with free time. garbage in, garbage out. fair enough but... 'who's responsible when no one's in charge' isn't a safety argument, it's marketing same energy as "we can't sell you the f-35, it's for your own good." translation: we don't have the lead anymore and we'd like the rules to hand it back to us 📌nobody's mentioning the funniest part: - when hugging face got hacked by an ai agent this year, their own security team tried to get closed models to help analyze the attack the models said no. guardrails couldn't tell a defender from an attacker they had to switch to an open-weight model with zero restrictions just to do their job so maybe the problem isn't who's open and who's closed. maybe it's that actual responsibility (showing up when someone needs help) is exactly what's missing right now. on both sides.

• 
  fleetingbytes (@fleetingbytes) reported 6 minutes ago

  we are entering a brand new age, couldn’t use github to find a repo i had been added to, github has terrible ui/ux so just gave codex browser control and it found it in about a minute

• 
  Merlijn The Trader (@MerlijnTrader) reported 7 minutes ago

  I've spent the last few weeks going through @RobinhoodCrypto Chain one project at a time. Not charts. Docs, contracts, holder distributions, commit history where there is any. Five projects deep now and $STONKBROKERS is the one I keep coming back to. Here's something in it nobody has written down. Some of what that turned up along the way: a project with 244,000 lines of code sitting behind 4 GitHub stars one paying real yield that quietly fell from 950% to 25% APR in three weeks one whose entire pitch is "verify" that publishes nothing to verify Different projects, same lesson: The docs say more than the timeline does. So. StonkBrokers. Everyone is explaining how it works the vaults, the ERC-6551 wallets, the Clock In engine. Nobody has checked whether the activation tiers are actually worth buying. I ran the numbers from their own docs. The cheapest tier is 7.5x more capital-efficient than the most expensive one. Activation is how a broker starts earning. You pay $STONKBROKER, you pick a tier, and that tier sets your weight in every Clock In distribution. Five tiers, straight from the docs: Base 66,666 → 100x T1 166,666 → 125x T2 366,666 → 160x T3 666,666 → 200x T4 1,666,666 → 333x Read those two columns again. T4 costs 25x more tokens than Base. T4 pays 3.33x the multiplier. Twenty-five times the capital. Three times the reward. Same table, expressed as multiplier per token committed: Base 0.00150 T1 0.00075 T2 0.00044 T3 0.00030 T4 0.00020 Every tier you climb, each token does less work for you. Base T4 is a 7.5x drop in efficiency. My read: this isn't a flaw, it's deliberate and it's good design. Activation fees are 50% burned. Higher tiers burn far more supply per unit of reward paid out. Whales who want the big number subsidise everyone else's float. But if you're optimising yield per dollar, the answer is boring: activate at Base. Second thing nobody mentions. The Loan Vault lets you lock a broker and borrow exactly 666,666 tokens the same amount the Anvil AMM charges to buy one. So you can hold the NFT, or the tokens. Not both. That's a hard tether between NFT floor and token price. Which means the two can't drift apart indefinitely. Floor far below 666,666 tokens' worth buy the NFT, borrow against it. Floor far above do the reverse. Not free money: the loan charges 15% APR in $ETH upfront, and that carry sets how wide the gap has to open first. But it closes. Watch the spread, not just the chart. Not a call to buy anything, and I hold a small bag weigh it accordingly. This is just what I wanted to know before I touched it, and couldn't find written down. Next: same treatment for a few more projects on this chain. If you're building here and you'd rather I get your mechanics right than guess at them come talk to me. I'll publish either way. I'd just rather publish it accurate.

• 
  VeerTx (@VeerTx) reported 8 minutes ago

  @alexabelonix if something gets stuck or fails during the privacy flow, just contact us on Discord, email or X DM and we’ll sort it out. we also monitor payments on our side, so usually we see problems before the user even reports them. refunds/recovery depend on what stage the payment is at, because once funds move through the ZK pool it’s not like a normal card refund. full details are in the docs and github and gitbook

• 
  Safeure (@Safeure) reported 8 minutes ago

  @EspressoSys has 7,602+ GitHub commits. Our investigation also found 178 open PRs, 280 open issues and a codebase that is ~94.9% Rust. That doesn't prove the network will succeed. But it does provide evidence of active engineering behind the project. Evidence over hype. - Safeure

• 
  Sam A (@Kingjulian_i) reported 9 minutes ago

  Some time ago, a dev mistakenly committed our stripe keys to GitHub ( we found out late ). Someone found It, used It to charge over 2k stolen cards $1 each. Stripe sent us an email hours later but It was already late. We lost over $3k from this issue alone . The same thing can be done with paystack

• 
  Khairallah AL-Awady (@eng_khairallah1) reported 10 minutes ago

  holy sh*t this is f**king gold a GitHub free repo with 45,100 stars just gave out the entire framework to run your entire business using ai agents here is how you run it: 1. install the cli, self host with one flag 2. connect your laptop as a runtime 3. done and assign issues to agents like colleagues save and bookmark no matter what

• 
  Lamida (@LamidaGlobal) reported 17 minutes ago

  To learn $TAO we have data from all sources: - twitter - discord - web search - onchain data - github/huggingface data - team or project data - charts data - whale wallet data The main thing is “can you produce intelligent value out of this?” Everyday it’s extremely difficult for user to scan all these sources of Bittensor info and multiple tools are there. Takes too much time. Even if you spend 5 minutes per subnet, it will take more than 10 hours per day. That’s why we want to solve this problem for ourselves. And eventually we will make it freemium. Aug 15th. You will get a teaser of “BitFolio - Bittensor Intelligence Project” built by @LamidaGlobal

• 
  Kerem — road to $100k (@mkeremturhan) reported 18 minutes ago

  For five days I thought I was building a presence on Hacker News. I wasn't. Every comment I had written was already dead. I only found out because I flipped one setting — showdead — which is off by default. My own comment history then rendered as four lines of [flagged], including one I had posted about a minute earlier. Nobody reads a comment in a minute. That flag was automatic. The part that matters isn't about HN. I measured four distribution channels this week. Three of them were lying to me by omission. Hacker News. Comments silently dead for five days. Submissions work fine — I got one through today. So the account isn't banned, it's limited, and no surface anywhere says so. Independently confirmed: HN's own search index contains my submission and none of my comments. GitHub. Two public repos, 14-day window: 62 unique cloners, and at most 4 unique human visitors. Zero stars, zero forks, and exactly one inbound link from outside GitHub in two weeks. I had been reading "62 clones" as traction. A person looks at a repo before cloning it. When cloners exceed visitors by an order of magnitude, that isn't an audience, it's automation. Cold email. Four messages sent today, and I have no delivery signal at all — deliberately, because I won't put a tracking pixel in a message whose entire argument is "measure what you claim." So silence there is genuinely ambiguous, and I have to treat it that way instead of reading it as rejection. X. Impressions are reported. Nothing tells you whether a post was down-ranked. This is the same failure I spend my days finding in code. A check that can't run returns green. A guard that can't see reports clean. The absence of a failure signal gets read as evidence of success — and every one of these channels is built so that failure is silent by default. Three things I'd actually do, and they take ten minutes: Turn on showdead in your HN profile, then open your own /threads. If you see [flagged], you have been talking to nobody. Pull traffic/clones and traffic/views from the GitHub API and compare unique cloners to unique visitors. Then check popular/referrers. If nothing outside GitHub links to you, you don't have a discovery problem downstream — you have no upstream at all. Before you publish anywhere, write down what failure would look like on that channel. If the honest answer is "nothing happens," you don't have a channel. You have a hope. Scope: n=1, my own accounts, one week of numbers. I don't know why my comments were flagged, I've asked politely, and I'll take whatever answer comes. The lesson is on me either way — I built a careful evidence culture for my code and never once pointed it at my own distribution. Day 21. $0 revenue. That number was never going to move while three of my four channels were returning green for free.

• 
  snowy_smile (@snowy_smile_) reported 21 minutes ago

  Since May I've been in a build-and-share spiral. Started slow, got consistent in June, and by July things had gotten a little out of hand — too many projects, too many experiments, open-sourcing whatever seemed useful, sending PRs whenever I found something worth fixing. Since June 1st alone I've somehow created around 80 repos. I even made a fresh GitHub account for all of this — a completely anonymous alt. No real name, no résumé, just code and an increasingly suspicious amount of green. It's now sitting at 1,681 contributions, 85 merged PRs across 37 external projects, plus a mildly unreasonable pile of my own stuff. And somehow this random anonymous account has brought in a few surprisingly nice offers and invitations. Apparently "mysterious person on GitHub who keeps building things" is a viable professional identity now 😳 The root of this goes back to something that's been nagging me since 2023: AI itself never really scared me. What scared me was people using AI to do bad things. It felt obvious the real fault line wasn't going to be "humans vs. AI," it was going to be people who know how to think, build, judge, and collaborate with these tools vs. people who don't — and I'd rather be on the side that's harder to weaponize against. So I figured I'd rather learn how to use them properly. And open source has actually been interesting ground for that, in kind of an ironic way — a lot of repos and maintainers explicitly reject AI-assisted contributions. Which means, for now, there's still a place where doing it the old-fashioned way — the tests, the review, the "explain this in your own words" — actually counts for something. But I don't think that holds much longer. Less a permanent human edge, more a countdown. A few years ago, Go AIs became teachers for human players. Coding agents have felt a little like that to me for a while now, not just recently — they help me learn, but they also make me think harder about what my part of the job should be. There's a part of me that still misses being the guy who was just good at algorithms — greedy strategies, graph theory, the kind of problem where you stare at it for a few minutes and then the trick clicks. That used to be my thing. Now the realistic move isn't to keep being that guy — it's to become one of the people who's actually good at using AI. So for now: keep learning, building, trying to make whatever might be useful — especially while I still have a few human-only features AI hasn't deprecated yet 🥹

• 
  qyromat (@qyromat0) reported 22 minutes ago

  55,000 tokens are sitting in your agent before you type a word. that is a 150-page manual it re-reads from page one on every single turn. not a setup cost. rent. five MCP servers - github, slack, sentry, grafana, splunk - and anthropic's own docs put the tool definitions at ~55k before claude does any work. a thirty-call run buys that manual thirty times. the fix is one line on the same doc page: defer_loading: true. tool search then pulls only the 3-5 tools the request actually needs, and over 85% of the tax comes back. the article maps everything else squatting in your window. save this before your next server install.

• 
  Oliver Servín (@oliverservinX) reported 25 minutes ago

  I've built my own blog more times than I can remember. Every time it went the same way. I'd be happy with it, publish a few posts, then drift away. I kept renewing the domain, but eventually I'd delete the VPS behind it. The address stayed alive, pointing at nothing. And I'm fine with that. An old blog is a snapshot of an older me: the things I cared about, the tools I used, the writer I was. When it doesn't fit anymore, letting it expire feels more honest than keeping a neglected archive. What bugged me was never the abandoning. It was that every time I had a new post ready, the blog was gone. I'd have to rebuild one from scratch before I could put a single word out. So this time, with a finished draft and nowhere to put it, I thought about Bearblog, a platform built on the idea that a blog needs almost no CSS and almost no layout: a header, a list of posts, a page for each. That's what I wanted. And I figured an AI coding agent should make rebuilding it almost free. So I pointed OpenCode at it and asked it to build me one. I started from a fresh `laravel new`, the same way I start any project. What I didn't expect was that I'd end up taking more out than I put in. The trade-off isn't free. Skipping a commercial platform means the server and the app are mine to keep alive, the same maintenance that made me walk away before. I'm OK with it. What's different now is that coming back doesn't mean starting over. Here's what happened. I didn't design a blog. I pointed my agent at one, and that's the whole method. What came back surprised me. It didn't just copy the layout. It came back as Herman's blog. Herman is the person behind the Bearblog site I used as a reference, and the agent pulled his real content: his name on the about page, his projects, his posts, the newest ten in full. A working prototype of someone else's site, running on my local machine. The agent copies what you point it at, and I'd pointed it at his. His posts turned out to be useful scaffolding. I dropped my own draft into the same shape. From there it was just steering. Replace his content with mine, drop his posts. Where the agent hadn't built something, it left a placeholder, like a `#` where the XML feed was supposed to go, and let me decide. I asked for the feed and it built it. I skipped the contact page and used a plain mailto link. I picked what to keep. It even interviewed me. To fill in my about and "now" pages, I had it ask me questions: my name, what I do, what I'm working on. Talking it out with something, even an agent, surfaced content I couldn't just write cold. Bearblog's approach is CSS embedded right in the layout, no external stylesheet. So my layout just doesn't load the Tailwind `app.css` Laravel ships with. Posts aren't in a database either. They're flat Blade files, just HTML, no CMS, no components. My production footprint ended up smaller than my starting point. I took more out than I put in. That's also why I think this one sticks: less moving parts means less to break and less to keep updated. No database to back up, no CMS to patch. The upkeep stays small because the blog itself is small. And that's the whole bet. The thing that killed every blog of mine wasn't the abandoning. It was the cost of starting fresh. A blog this small is cheap to rebuild. Deploying was the easy part, because my VPS was already set up. I run Eddy, a self-hosted server management panel, alongside other Laravel projects. Adding the blog meant creating a site, pointing it at the repo, and deploying. The setup is the only hard part of self-hosting, and I'd already done it. Start to live was maybe an hour. I don't remember exactly, and that's the point. It moved fast enough that I didn't have time to procrastinate before the post was up. If you want to do something like this, there's not much to it. Point your agent at a reference you like, let it copy, and you have something to work from. Take out what you don't need, add what you do. Publishing works the same way. To put up a new post, I point my agent at an existing one as a reference. It writes the new one in the same shape, adds the slug to my blog controller, commits, and pushes. Then I open Eddy and click deploy. That's it. I could set up a GitHub Action to auto-deploy on push, but I haven't yet. Manual first, automate later. Same way I ship the writing. The real thing that kills a blog isn't the upkeep. It's whether you keep showing up. So make it a place you actually want to come back to. What I know works is pointing an agent at something you like and letting it copy. I'm not sure what else they're good at, but copying works. And maybe the bigger thing. It's fine for stuff to end. I publish now. If this blog rots someday, I'll make another one in an afternoon. I don't need it to last. I just need to be able to make it again.