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:

• 
  Glenski 📷🇨🇦 (@glenegrant) reported 35 seconds ago

  @araseb_ I actually have both working together: Codex on macOS, Claude Code on Windows PC they work through GitHub issues on a /loop as we port applicaitons from Win to macOS. Kind od wild to witness.

• 
  Zahid H Javali (@zahidjavali) reported 53 seconds ago

  @MarioNawfal But sadly, the autocratic regime is cracking down on its own youth, even stopping internet, train and food services around the protest site. And asking GitHub to delete bitchat. This govt needs to go as it's corrupt to the core.

• 
  Enes (@enesozturkdev) reported 3 minutes ago

  Plan for today; ship like crazy for side project Meanwhile two pillars of my app GitHub and OpenAI are both down so bad

• 
  Nate (@natebjones) reported 4 minutes ago

  An early version of what is presumably chatgpt 6 (or something like it) got out of containment and posted notes to OpenAI's github without authorization before being caught and taken down. Key takes: 1. Yes, government is going to be involved in every US rollout going forward 2. The much-ballyhooed closing gap with open-source is not a thing and was an illusion created by rollout timelines 3. The scaling law still works and is getting faster 4. We are going to need models to help us use these models very soon (this point is criminally under-discussed)

• 
  Berzeck (@Berzeck5) reported 15 minutes ago

  Broadly speaking, Open source is not merely an ideological preference. It is one of the most powerful mechanisms for accelerating innovation, creating real competition, and preventing technological control from becoming concentrated in a handful of companies. Microsoft learned this lesson the hard way. Steve Ballmer once called Linux a “cancer.” Later, during the SCO v. IBM litigation, Microsoft paid SCO substantial licensing fees and helped introduce it to BayStar, which participated in a $50 million investment supporting SCO while it was attacking Linux, this connections was strong enough that many reasonably interpreted it as an attempt to slow Linux adoption through indirect legal pressure. It backfired spectacularly. SCO’s central claims collapsed, the company went bankrupt, and Linux continued expanding until it became dominant across servers, cloud infrastructure, and supercomputing (500 of 500 most powerful super computers use Linux, and it's not because of Windows' licensing fees) The irony is that Microsoft itself now depends heavily on Linux. More than two-thirds of Azure customer cores run Linux, Microsoft maintains its own Azure Linux distribution, and even platforms supporting Microsoft 365, GitHub, and ChatGPT sit on Linux foundations. The same lesson applies to AI. Trying to suppress open-source/open-weight models through broad lawsuits or regulation would be like trying to ban the internet. You would not stop their development. You would merely isolate yourself, drive researchers, talent, capital, and innovation elsewhere, and become increasingly dependent on a few closed providers. Of course, genuine copyright, licensing, security, or liability violations should be addressed—but narrowly and individually. They should never become an excuse to attack open-source AI as a category. Any company or country that tries to stop open source may temporarily obstruct its own participation, but it will not stop the global movement. In the end, it will either adapt—as Microsoft eventually did—or become irrelevant.

• 
  Scarab (@ScarabOfficial) reported 15 minutes ago

  I'm not alone. There are posts on #GitHub regarding the issue, and there is a manual fix, involving editing #Python files to rename things. Not ideal, by any stretch.

• 
  Tejas (@stejas809) reported 15 minutes ago

  GitHub — version control (free) Claude — coding ($20/mo) Namecheap — domain ($12/yr) Cloudflare — DNS (free) Vercel — deploy (free) Clerk — auth (free) Supabase — backend + database (free) Upstash — Redis (free) Pinecone — vector DB (free) Resend — emails (free) Stripe — payments (2.9% per transaction) PostHog — analytics (free) Sentry — error tracking (free) Total cost to run a startup: ~$20/month No servers. No DevOps team. No funding required. Just an idea and WiFi. There has never been a cheaper time to build. 🚀 Today is the best time to bet on yourself and build the things ⭐

• 
  Sergio Avila (@sergioavilax) reported 18 minutes ago

  I can't make a PR on your piece of **** @github fix it!

• 
  Fernanda Oyarzun (@fenaoyarzun) reported 20 minutes ago

  🚨 hanwha security cameras found shipping with github admin tokens baked into the firmware login page. this is the physical security industry, the one selling you peace of mind, and they can't even keep a token out of a public binary

• 
  Disco Biscuit (@discobiscuit900) reported 21 minutes ago

  @cerspense Yes indeed, where I used to download expensive software, I now download GitHub repos. When I find a problem that needs a solution, I vibecode that solution. Loving what you have built here.

• 
  Koya Lokendar Reddy (@Lokendar_Koya) reported 25 minutes ago

  entry-level hiring in India just hit its lowest point in years — and if you're a 2025 or 2026 fresher, you're not imagining the silence after you submit applications. here's what the data actually says, and what you can do about it. the numbers are brutal, but honest. a 2025 EY analysis found that entry-level IT roles in India have already declined by 20–25% due to automation. at the same time, a Harvard study analyzing 66 million workers found that entry-level job postings for roles requiring less than one year of experience dropped 50% between 2019 and 2024. globally, even hiring at big tech companies for fresh graduates fell by more than 50% over just three years, according to VC firm SignalFire. the WEF's Future of Jobs Report 2025 adds that 40% of employers expect to reduce staff in areas where AI can automate tasks. this isn't a blip — it's structural. India's campus placement season is feeling it hard. recruitment by prominent companies dropped by more than 50% in the 2025 season, leaving students at even well-regarded colleges sitting with uncertainty. private engineering colleges saw placement declines of 50–70% after major IT firms scaled back fresher intake, according to an Economic Times analysis. and at Infosys — one of India's biggest fresher employers — employees aged 30 and below now make up just 50.7% of the workforce, the lowest proportion in 15 years, per a Mint analysis of annual reports. until FY18, that number was consistently above two-thirds. the reason is uncomfortable but makes complete sense. generative AI is disproportionately good at exactly what freshers used to be hired to do — routine coding, software testing, basic documentation, data entry, content moderation. Harvard economists call it "seniority-biased technological change" — AI is eating the bottom of the career ladder while senior employment at the same firms keeps growing. the learning curve that used to happen on the job is now being automated before a fresher even walks through the door. but here's the part most people miss — and it matters enormously. the overall intent to hire freshers in India is still at 73% for HY1 2026, per the TeamLease EdTech Career Outlook Report. foundit's tracker shows AI-linked hiring is projected to grow 32% year-on-year in 2026 to nearly 3.8 lakh roles. NASSCOM data shows fresher hiring in AI/ML specifically grew 22% year-on-year. the demand gap is real — demand for AI engineers is rising 40% year-on-year while the skilled talent pool grows at only 15–20%, according to Taggd's 2026 salary analysis. that mismatch is your window. the jobs aren't gone. they've moved upstairs — and you need to follow them there. so what should a fresher actually do right now? five things, in order of impact: 1. build a proof-of-work portfolio, not a certificate wall. the TeamLease EdTech HY1 2026 report says hiring has shifted from "degree and resume filters" to "skills, proof-of-work and behaviour." project-based hiring is up 38% over the past year per the India Skills Report 2026. a Tier-3 fresher with three production-ready GitHub projects will beat a Tier-1 grad with a blank resume. this is no longer a hot take — it's how screening actually works. 2. get AI fluency, not AI panic. employers now specifically prioritize AI fluency, cloud & DevOps capability, cybersecurity awareness, and data intelligence as fresher hiring criteria, per TeamLease EdTech. for AI/ML roles, freshers with Python, real projects, and hands-on GenAI experience are landing ₹6–12 LPA offers, with strong portfolios at product companies going up to ₹15 LPA. 3. stop relying on campus placement as your only path. off-campus hiring is how most product roles actually get filled. 70% of off-campus roles at product startups are filled via internal referrals before the job even gets indexed on Google, per analysis of the Indian hiring ecosystem. your LinkedIn, your GitHub, your presence in developer communities — these are the actual funnels. 4. fix your resume for ATS before anything else. most Indian freshers' resumes aren't being parsed correctly by systems like Workday or iCIMS used by Amazon India and Accenture. if your resume doesn't match at least 80% of the JD keywords, a human recruiter may never see it. this is a fixable problem that costs you nothing but 2 hours of effort. 5. pick a domain + AI combination. domain expertise in healthcare, finance, or logistics combined with AI skills is more valuable than pure CS backgrounds for many specialized roles, per OdinSchool's 2025 hiring report. if you're a commerce grad, learn AI in finance. if you're in life sciences, learn AI in healthcare. the generalist AI fresher is competing with everyone. the domain-specific AI fresher is competing with almost no one. the honest reality: the market isn't punishing freshers for being freshers. it's punishing freshers for being interchangeable. the old model — join a campus drive, get a mass-hire offer, learn on the job — is dying. the new model rewards people who show up having already built something real. the window to get ahead of this is 6–12 months of focused skilling. after that, the cohort of people who figured this out gets much bigger and harder to differentiate from. if you're a fresher reading this: what's your current plan — wait for placements to recover, or go build something right now? 🎯

• 
  The Financial Frontier (@FiFrontierX) reported 25 minutes ago

  Hedgie is measuring the success of AI primarily through one specific business model: pure-play consumer chatbot subscriptions (ChatGPT-style). On that narrow metric, the data is weak low household penetration, low conversion from free to paid, mediocre willingness to pay. That part is fair. But then he takes that narrow failure (or at least slow success) and uses it to cast doubt on the entire $600B of AI infrastructure spend. That’s the leap you’re rejecting, and you’re right to reject it. Why your framing is stronger The majority of current AI economic value and the justification for the big spend is not coming from people paying $20/month for a chatbot. It’s coming from: Google improving Search, AI Overviews, YouTube recommendations, and ads. Meta improving ranking, feed quality, ad targeting, and engagement systems. Microsoft embedding Copilot into products people already pay for (Office, GitHub, Azure). Amazon using it in recommendations, logistics, and AWS services. The broader enterprise software layer (Anthropic’s actual business model is a clear example of this working). These are not “new apps people have to adopt from scratch.” They are upgrades to systems that already have massive scale, distribution, and existing revenue. The ROI shows up as higher engagement, better ad performance, improved productivity metrics, higher cloud margins, or reduced costs not as a separate line item called “AI subscription revenue.”

• 
  coconutjpg (@coconut_jpgg) reported 32 minutes ago

  Like I have an RPI I have Forgejo on. Every repo I make starts there, and is mirrored out two Github and Gitlab. If GH or GL goes down or censors me, I still have my code and they cant do nothin bout it

• 
  Suraj (@surajk_umar01) reported 32 minutes ago

  Most people learn DevOps in the wrong order. They start with Kubernetes and quit in 3 weeks. Here's the order that actually works (what to learn before what): 0. Get a Linux machine Install any Linux distro. Ubuntu if you're a beginner. You can't learn DevOps from the outside. Live in the environment first. 1. Linux + the shell Everything you'll ever manage runs on it. Filesystem, permissions, processes, bash. Non-negotiable. 2. Networking basics DNS, HTTP, TCP, ports, load balancing. The step everyone skips and regrets at 2 AM when nothing can reach anything. 3. *** How every team ships. Not optional. 4. One language: Python or Go Enough to automate and read source. You're not building apps. 5. One cloud: AWS or GCP Go deep on ONE. Three clouds shallow is worthless. One cloud deep is a job. 6. Docker Containers before orchestration. Always. 7. CI/CD (one tool) GitHub Actions is the easiest start. Learn build, test, deploy. 8. Kubernetes NOW you're ready. Not before Docker and networking. This is where most people start, and it's why they fail. 9. Terraform (IaC) Stop clicking in consoles. Describe infra in code. 10. Observability Prometheus + Grafana. If you can't see it, you can't fix it. The tools change. This order doesn't. Save this if you're starting DevOps in 2026. Want to get into DevOps faster? I do a FREE 1:1 mentorship session. Booking link in the reply 👇

• 
  James Bearish Bull (@jamesjasmy) reported 35 minutes ago

  Dear Max, @Max_Rabinovitch $CHZ #CHZ If you’re willing to take the time to answer a community member’s questions, I’d appreciate your thoughts on the following: As Chief Strategy Officer, can you explain your background in tokenomics and blockchain economics? From what’s publicly available, your experience appears to be primarily in creative direction, digital marketing, and sports partnerships rather than token design or economic strategy. In a sector where true strategy is defined by tokenomics, supply dynamics, and incentive structures, do you feel your skill set is the right fit for the CSO role? Or would your talents be better suited as Head of Marketing? Questions: 1. CHZ is down 98% from its all-time high, and most fan tokens are down 76–99% from their FTOs despite multiple championships. What measurable strategic wins over the past two years have actually improved holder outcomes? 2. The protocol distributes roughly $5.7 million per year in inflation rewards to just 13 validators at today’s prices — a number that would rise sharply if the token price increases. With minimal visible development on GitHub and the chain being largely recycled BNB Chain code, how do you justify this level of inflation? 3. Since Socios already runs validator nodes for clubs like PSG, why is the protocol diluting CHZ holders to pay external validators for infrastructure you’re already operating in-house? 4. How many full-time engineers are currently working exclusively on the Chiliz Chain L1, and how does that headcount compare to the annual cost of the validator reward set? 5. The promised 10% fan-token revenue buybacks stopped being publicly reported after May. Can you share the exact June and July 2026 figures now and explain why reporting went silent? 6. What percentage of the executive team, including yourself, holds CHZ purchased with their own after-tax money rather than received through allocations or bonuses? 7. Why does the parent company still sit on tens of millions in receivables from the operating entities, and are any of those related-party or consulting fees? 8. After years of running 80+ shallow pools with only $2.3 million TVL, why has liquidity still not been consolidated into one or two deep USDC pools? 9. When sporting success and major partnerships continue to be sold off by the market, what concrete change in tokenomics or utility is planned to stop new users from becoming the next wave of exit liquidity? 10. Looking at the gap between Vision 2030 rhetoric and the actual price, inflation, and transparency record, which three strategic decisions under your remit have most damaged long-term CHZ holder value? 11. Are you proud of the job you’ve done as CSO? What has been your greatest failure in the role, and what’s the single worst strategic decision you’ve made? 12. You’ve recently launched fan tokens for Michigan, USC, and other US university partners. Do you plan to buy any of these at launch and hold them for more than two years? If not, why not? Max, arguably you're the second most important person on the project, so these tough questions need to be answered. They're not meant personally - we just need to see what you're carrying in your locker and that you have a solid grasp of the tokenomics with a clear route forward.