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

Incident with Github.com [resolved]

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#611

Post by insane_dreamer »

icepush wrote: post #268
Arubis wrote: post #99

This is starting to feel like Twitter. For a variety of reasons, we had a centralized place where everyone of a particular set of persuasions could connect, and this had outsize benefits for the community as a whole. That place is becoming untenable, and with the loss of goodwill and stability, the community’s started to dissipate. But there isn’t one obvious transition candidate, so the diaspora is finding itself sp…

I think that, exactly how 95% of the people that left Twitter eventually returned, we will see a similar outflux of people from Github and the vast majority of them will quietly be back in a few months.

> how 95% of the people that left Twitter eventually returned

and this assertion is based on ... ?

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#612

Post by aurareturn »

duped wrote: post #407
leishman wrote: post #171

I don't understand why Github hasn't solved this problem with pricing updates. My understanding is they are getting hammered with LLM generated code growing their traffic by over an order of magnitude. So why not rate limit non-paying users and charge for whatever scarce resource is being consumed that is causing them to constantly fall-over? This seems like a basic economics problem.

Microsoft executives have an incentive to pretend that AI is great and scaling it has no problems

I recently analyzed my commit history.

Last month, I made more commits than my entire 2025 combined.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#613

Post by MatthiasPortzel »

adverbly wrote: post #568
leishman wrote: post #171

I don't understand why Github hasn't solved this problem with pricing updates. My understanding is they are getting hammered with LLM generated code growing their traffic by over an order of magnitude. So why not rate limit non-paying users and charge for whatever scarce resource is being consumed that is causing them to constantly fall-over? This seems like a basic economics problem.

> My understanding is they are getting hammered with LLM generated code growing their traffic by over an order of magnitude Seems presumptuous to assume a root case while the incident is still ongoing, no?

https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/an-update-on-...

They’ve been having issues for a while.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#615

Post by agos »

adverbly wrote: post #568
leishman wrote: post #171

I don't understand why Github hasn't solved this problem with pricing updates. My understanding is they are getting hammered with LLM generated code growing their traffic by over an order of magnitude. So why not rate limit non-paying users and charge for whatever scarce resource is being consumed that is causing them to constantly fall-over? This seems like a basic economics problem.

> My understanding is they are getting hammered with LLM generated code growing their traffic by over an order of magnitude Seems presumptuous to assume a root case while the incident is still ongoing, no?

they've been complaining about LLM generated code and the related traffic for months now, this specific incident might not be caused by it but the general trend is

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#616

Post by albatross79 »

zmgsabst wrote: post #408
malfist wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feel free to disregard this because ultimately its a tangent that doesn't matter; but supermajority is specifically a political term referring to the required threshold to advance legislation when simple majority isn't procedurally enough. It doesn't mean simply a greater share of.a majority

This is how language evolves. For supermajority: the construction means “beyond majority” or “above majority”, it is implemented as a higher percentage in most systems, and there is a utility in being able to refer to high ratio majority. So people have repurposed a technical word to a general word, of roughly the same meaning.

No, some usage is just wrong, even if many people are doing it.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#618

Post by dabbz »

scrollaway wrote: post #529
cbmalll wrote: post #455

June 17, 2023: Dohmke says Copilot will write 80% of code: https://www.freethink.com/robots-ai/github-copilot Slop code is written and pushed ... Aug 11, 2025: Dohmke leaves the sinking ship: https://www.entrepreneur.com/business-news/github-ceo-thomas... This is a true AI victory.

Do y'all have any evidence that github's recent outages are caused by slopcode rather than the significant increase in load, which is exactly what Github & MS have been claiming as the root cause? I'm tired of these BS stories being pushed by green accounts on HN like there's some damn agenda by someone who thinks their job will be saved "if only the CEOs realized that Slopcode Bad".

I mean one of those makes them look better than the other. That makes it tricky to be able to tell what is truth vs half truth vs a lie. You're right though, based off of what they claim, their great success is the cause of their failure.

How hard is it to up scale their servers though...

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#619

Post by aic0d3r »

jph wrote: post #362

Help encourage alternatives by trying Gitlab.com or Codeberg.org or Tangled.org or others, and please star some projects there to help motivate more options. Self-promo links below if you would like to star a few of mine good for developers. https://gitlab.com/architecture-decision-record https://gitlab.com/ways-of-working https://gitlab.com/coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure

gitlab has my vote

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#620

Post by bob1029 »

I am noticing a fairly mundane trend in that the GitHub outages tend to coincide with periods of (likely) high demand. This feels to me like a capacity issue more than a software bug crisis. At 4am on Saturdays GitHub never has any problems.

Centralization combined with massive AI demand is almost certainly the problem. If you move to GitHub Enterprise (on your own servers), you can probably exceed the availability of the current public cloud environment.

It is surprising that GHES rarely comes up as an option. It is a really good answer to this particular issue and eliminates the need to retrain the team on new tools. I understand the inclination to get salty about a vendor and cast the proverbial baby out with the bath water, but we must resist our impulses if we wish to make decisions that the business will find agreeable. The incremental additional licensing cost of moving from public cloud to on-prem is roughly $15-20 per user seat. If you only have 10-20 people using GH today and are deeply struggling with the consequences of these outages, this seems like a pretty easy decision to make.

Post reply on HN