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:

• 
  HowToDoAffiliateMarketing.com (@AffiliateLetter) reported 21 seconds ago

  Is there a known issue with the GitHub connector/tool sessions right now in @OpenAI @ChatGPT /Codex? anyone else facing the same issue?

• 
  StonedModder (@StonedModder) reported 37 seconds ago

  @SeregonWar @github GitHub uses AI for minor things. They actually have a trust and safety team. Issue is they’ve laid off so much of that team tickets are slooow

• 
  Mark Kadirov (@KadirovMar13725) reported 12 minutes ago

  @josefchen @snowmaker @josefchen Hi Josef — Epicure MCP is still not working in ChatGPT. It returns 401 / authentication errors even though the docs say Auth: None. GitHub issue #9 is still open. Could you please take a look?

• 
  wispem-wantex (@wispem_wantex) reported 12 minutes ago

  @Parakramtweets I use Linear at work, which unfortunately I am not in charge of. I prefer gitea issues (or github issues), personally.

• 
  Adrian Rangel (@acrogenesis) reported 12 minutes ago

  They can't handle the infrastructure hit. That's one of the reasons GitHub is having so many issues lately

• 
  Gaurav Chande (@gmchande) reported 13 minutes ago

  @GiaMMacool I asked AI to create a version of this post for nerds and founder type. Actually very good: X is Instagram for people who think they’re too smart for Instagram. A perfectly content engineer, founder, researcher, investor, or writer can open X and 20 minutes later become convinced they’re wasting their life. Someone just raised a $40M Series A. Someone’s weekend project has 30,000 GitHub stars. Some 23-year-old built in 48 hours what you’ve been thinking about for six months. A three-person startup just hit $10M ARR. Someone you used to work with is suddenly on every podcast. Some researcher dropped a paper everyone is talking about. Some anonymous account has 200,000 followers and appears to understand your own industry better than you do. Suddenly your good job feels like stagnation. Your project feels embarrassingly small. Your startup feels slow. Your salary feels mediocre. The thing you’ve spent two years building feels irrelevant because someone else launched something shinier on Tuesday. Even an afternoon spent reading, thinking, playing with your kids, or doing absolutely nothing starts to feel like you’re falling behind. So you start picking apart your life. “I should be building more.” “I’m not moving fast enough.” “I picked the wrong industry.” “I should have started a company.” “I should have raised money.” “I should be publishing.” “I need more followers.” “Everyone else figured out AI before me.” But here’s what nerds forget: This is a highlight reel too. The launch is curated. The revenue graph starts at the convenient date. The GitHub stars don’t show retention. The fundraise doesn’t show dilution. The valuation isn’t money in the bank. The successful project doesn’t show the twelve dead ones sitting in abandoned repositories. The paper announcement doesn’t show the rejected drafts. The podcast clip doesn’t show the decade spent being ignored. The “built this in a weekend” demo doesn’t show the ten years of expertise that made the weekend possible. And the 23-year-old genius might genuinely be a genius. That still doesn’t mean his life is the counterfactual version of yours. You are comparing your entire private process — the uncertainty, boredom, false starts, family obligations, mediocre Tuesdays and unfinished work — to everyone else’s most impressive public artifact. Of course you feel behind. Instagram turns insecurity into consumption. X turns ambition into compulsion. And smart people are especially good at convincing themselves it isn’t happening. “I’m not scrolling. I’m learning.” “This is industry research.” “I need to stay current.” “I’m networking.” “I’m looking for alpha.” “I’m seeing what people are building.” Sometimes you are. And sometimes you’re spending three hours mainlining the achievements of thousands of unusually successful people and wondering why your one human life doesn’t contain all of them. That’s the trick. The vice gets to wear a suit and call itself work. X doesn’t need to convince you that you’re stupid. It only needs to keep showing you someone smarter. It doesn’t need to convince you that you’re unsuccessful. It only needs to show you someone richer. It doesn’t need to convince you that you’re lazy. It only needs to show you someone shipping faster. It doesn’t need to convince you that your life is bad. It only needs to make everyone else’s trajectory look steeper. Then your brain does the rest. Your perfectly reasonable ambitions metastasize into permanent inadequacy. You abandon good projects for fashionable ones. You mistake visibility for importance. You mistake fundraising for success. You mistake followers for influence. You mistake GitHub stars for usefulness. You mistake being early to the discourse for actually being right. And eventually you can spend your whole life optimizing for things that look impressive in a feed instead of things you actually wanted before you opened the app. Your job isn’t worthless because someone raised a Series A. Your company isn’t failing because someone else is growing faster. Your project isn’t stupid because nobody retweeted it. Your life isn’t small because it doesn’t screenshot well. Nerds aren’t above the Instagram crowd. We just replaced handbags, vacations and private jets with benchmarks, cap tables, podcast clips, follower counts and GitHub stars. Same primate brain. Higher-IQ status symbols.

• 
  Emrah (@emrahdma) reported 15 minutes ago

  Github is down? 😬

• 
  Martin Szerment | Practical AI (@MartinSzerment) reported 19 minutes ago

  Claude Code just erased the line between terminal and desktop app. Every AI coding tool assumed CLI and GUI were separate worlds, each with its own session history and its own memory of what you'd done. Two GitHub issues sat open for months, #50067 and #50891, both asking for exactly this: resume a CLI session inside the desktop app with full context intact. This isn't a cosmetic sync feature. The full conversation and state carry over, not a summary. The real shift is that your development environment stops caring which interface you started in. Give it a year and "which app did I use" will feel as irrelevant as asking someone their preferred terminal emulator. The CLI stops being the "real" tool and the desktop app the "friendly" wrapper. They become one session, viewed from two windows. Terminal purists who dismissed the desktop app as training wheels just lost an argument. Pick up exactly where you left off, in whichever window is open. That's the whole point of a tool built to work with you, not around you.

• 
  Nish (@NishantRArora) reported 22 minutes ago

  @thelifeofrishi Here’s Opus explaining my setup- The model isn't the hard part. The scaffolding around it is. Claude Code feels good because of everything you don't see — the retry when a call fails, the loop that keeps going, knowing when it's finished. Swap in an open model and you lose all that. The model isn't dumber, it's just naked. So don't fix it with better prompts. Fix it with plumbing. What I run: **Don't write your own agent loop.** Use one that already exists — Pi, OpenCode, Cline, Aider. Any of them. Whatever clever thing you're about to build, it's already in there. **Use many models, not one.** I keep ~13 provider slots. Free and cheap ones die all the time — rate limits, dead credits. So each retry picks a different one. Pin yourself to one provider and one bad hour stops everything. **Let the OS handle retries.** systemd restarts failed jobs, backs off, gives up after N tries. It's free and it doesn't lie about what's running. If you're writing retry logic in bash, stop. **GitHub issues are the to-do list.** Label it ready, agent picks it up, opens a PR. Nothing custom. Everyone sees the same board. **Tests catch the mistakes, not the model.** This is the trick that makes cheap models work: let them be wrong, and let CI catch it. A dumb model behind good tests beats a smart one behind none. **Three jobs, never the same model doing all three.** - One plans and decides. Never touches files. - Cheap ones do the actual work. - Others judge it. The judge is the important one. A model marking its own homework always passes. **Judges vote in threes.** Three of them look at the same piece of work, each one fresh — no seeing the others' answers, no seeing who wrote it. Two out of three agree or it doesn't ship. And they run on *different* models on purpose: when three different families all say the same thing, it's probably true. When they split, that's your warning light. **Nobody grades their own work.** The one that wrote it can't be on the panel judging it. Sounds obvious, but it's the rule that quietly does the most. **Judges go first, not last.** Before a worker starts, a judge writes down what "done" looks like. No spec, no start. Most agent failures aren't bad code — they're the model deciding for itself what the task was. **Score the judges too.** Track how often a judge gets overturned. Otherwise they drift into rubber-stamping everything and you've just added cost. Once this is running you stop caring which model does the typing, which is the whole point.

• 
  Udit Khandelwal (@UditKhandelwal8) reported 22 minutes ago

  @Odalo_Eguabor @coderabbitai Good review tooling earns its place, it catches what an agent would otherwise miss. I felt this part should not be paid though, so I built review-assist as an open source MCP server with an optional GitHub action. I run it at commit time.

• 
  Toufiq Qureshi (@Toufiq651) reported 23 minutes ago

  Day 1 of building Interview yaar🚀 Tech hiring has a measurement problem. We say we want engineers who can design systems, reason about trade-offs, and debug production. Then we test them on whiteboard DSA puzzles they will never write again. So the loop looks like this: → Company asks Leetcode Hard → Candidate grinds 6 months of patterns → Candidate gets hired → Candidate can't debug a race condition in **** We're not measuring bad engineers. We're measuring the wrong thing. Here's my bet: The best interview signal already exists. It's sitting in the candidate's GitHub. Their architecture decisions, their trade-offs, the shortcuts they took at 2am and never cleaned up. So I'm building Interviwyaar— an AI interviewer that reads your actual repository, understands how it's built, and interviews you on YOUR code. Not trivia. Your code. Over the next 30 days I'm building this completely in public. You'll see: • Why I split the backend into Go + Python • How I beat GitHub's API rate limits for free • A race condition that let users bypass billing entirely • A voice interview feature with low TTS-to-STT latency • Every bug, including the embarrassing ones Follow if you like backend engineering with the messy parts left in. #buildinpublic #golang #ai

• 
  ShireXela (@ShireXela) reported 25 minutes ago

  Is there a way to completely delete an absolutely shameful GitHub issue from existence?

• 
  Jarkko (@JarSyr) reported 27 minutes ago

  Then SpaceX acquired Cursor on August 14. Three days later, Cursor launched Origin, its own GitHub competitor. And two weeks after that, OpenAI publicly said it wasn’t confident SpaceX would follow its terms and started winding down the relationship. Hard to ignore the timing.

• 
  Taylor (@WarheadTaylor) reported 30 minutes ago

  @theo and github wasn't down to stop it :(

• 
  BigDataTechBro (@_ImDaniel__) reported 30 minutes ago

  @maximbilan If you use TestFlight you can share the screenshots directly to the App Store Connect then have the agent read them as GitHub issues