Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub had connectivity problems

status.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 175 posts

Re: GitHub had connectivity problems

#91

Post by narrowrail »

madez wrote: post #27
Zirro wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be nice not to have to rely on centralized servers at all. A P2P/torrent client built specifically for sharing code from git repositories, perhaps?

But there is much less commercial incentive behind a p2p alternative. Centralized services are easier to monetize. I look forward to the day governments start to fund free software, for example through the GNU project. Then we'll all have better tools. Actually, there were already some fundings. Germany funded GnuPG to port it to Windows. What do I care what is the new world record in sprinting? But I very much do ca…

Instead of gov. funded software, I like the idea of hedge fund backed FOSS, where the commercial software competition are publicly traded. This would allow the hedge funds to realize returns, but only if the FOSS produced is viable. Such an arrangement would probably benefit under a non-profit foundation to administer the project(s).

Re: GitHub had connectivity problems

#93

Post by toxican »

dhimes wrote: post #73
masukomi wrote: post #72

i'm sorry but... GitHub IS not GitHub are Examples: GitHub IS a web site. GitHub is a SAAS app. The only plural aspect to GitHub is its employees and they are not being DDoSed. The web site (singular) is. I'm not going to bother explaining the problems with "under DDoS" or the other issues with this sentence.

It's a British thing. Don't try to understand it- just let it be. :)

It makes sense, but "is" is too ingrained in my brain to ever go British.

Re: GitHub had connectivity problems

#94

Post by maxander »

nns wrote: post #92

What do they possibly get by DDoS'ng GitHub ? Is this out of pure malice or are there any probable commercial gains to this?

There's two common flavors of comment on this post, namely "why would anyone do this?" and "well, I guess that means I can't do any work this morning." These could go together somehow. :)

Re: GitHub had connectivity problems

#95

Post by mahouse »

kevinbowman wrote: post #62

Does anyone else find the Github status "messages" page [0] a bit jarring in how it's organised? The way that, when read from top to bottom, time goes forwards within a day but backwards across days? I guess I normally wouldn't notice, but there are currently some messages on there from today and yesterday and I found it hard to read as a story (either forwards or backwards) - I had to jump around a bit to figure it…

Design looks very, very confusing regarding timestamps. https://i.imgur.com/wminZWg.png

Re: GitHub had connectivity problems

#96

Post by codeshaman »

masukomi wrote: post #72

i'm sorry but... GitHub IS not GitHub are Examples: GitHub IS a web site. GitHub is a SAAS app. The only plural aspect to GitHub is its employees and they are not being DDoSed. The web site (singular) is. I'm not going to bother explaining the problems with "under DDoS" or the other issues with this sentence.

Technically, the Github servers are being attacked.

The "website" (or "app") is the abstract thing that runs on those servers. The servers are trying to service a flood of incoming tcp connections and http requests from rogue clients, which slows them down.

So "are" is not entirely out of place, but of course we all got the message ;).

Re: GitHub had connectivity problems

#97

Post by hellbanner »

kevinbowman wrote: post #62

Does anyone else find the Github status "messages" page [0] a bit jarring in how it's organised? The way that, when read from top to bottom, time goes forwards within a day but backwards across days? I guess I normally wouldn't notice, but there are currently some messages on there from today and yesterday and I found it hard to read as a story (either forwards or backwards) - I had to jump around a bit to figure it…

Is there a repo you can make an issue / PR on?

Re: GitHub had connectivity problems

#98

Post by jlcx »

mallamanis wrote: post #28
Zirro wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be nice not to have to rely on centralized servers at all. A P2P/torrent client built specifically for sharing code from git repositories, perhaps?

There is this https://code.google.com/p/gittorrent/ although I've never tried it... edit: a more recent (?) link https://github.com/cjb/gittorrent

I think they're two different projects, but this is exactly what I thought of. A separate Chinese DDoS was even mentioned by cjb in his announcement of GitTorrent a few months ago: http://blog.printf.net/articles/2015/05/29/announcing-gittor...

Re: GitHub had connectivity problems

#100

Post by scourge »

narrowrail wrote: post #91
madez wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But there is much less commercial incentive behind a p2p alternative. Centralized services are easier to monetize. I look forward to the day governments start to fund free software, for example through the GNU project. Then we'll all have better tools. Actually, there were already some fundings. Germany funded GnuPG to port it to Windows. What do I care what is the new world record in sprinting? But I very much do ca…

Instead of gov. funded software, I like the idea of hedge fund backed FOSS, where the commercial software competition are publicly traded. This would allow the hedge funds to realize returns, but only if the FOSS produced is viable. Such an arrangement would probably benefit under a non-profit foundation to administer the project(s).

I'm just back from lunch, so I'm struggling to follow. How would the "hedge fund backed FOSS, where the commercial software competition are publicly traded" work?
Post reply on HN