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

The August 17 outage

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 804 posts

Re: The August 17 outage

#621

Post by jangxx »

user43928 wrote: post #576
croes wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong. I don’t dislike AI but really of mine are negatively affected by climate change and AI isn’t helping what is easily observed when Google and MS scrapped their CO2 reduction targets. So every time I use AI I think about the necessity and usefulness of what I‘m doing with AI and if the use outweighs the costs. Since the rise of AI the environmental impact doesn’t seem to matter anymore. I guess because it’s the…

You're not helping your case by questioning the usefulness of software produced with AI in the same comment section, or complaining about other people supposedly compromising their own privacy in overusing AI. The reason it doesn't matter is because the environmental impact is moderate, and the benefit obviously tremendous.

The environmental impact is anything but moderate and the benefits are not obviously tremendous at all. I'm happy using Claude Code as much as the next guy, but saying that the impact has been "tremendous" is vastly overstating the actual results.

Re: The August 17 outage

#622

Post by jzer0cool »

Interview question. How would you handle the growing traffic needs and traffic spikes. I'm curious whether any existing architectural diagram of theirs would highlight a potential failure post-mordem.

Re: The August 17 outage

#623

Post by owebmaster »

jzer0cool wrote: post #622

Interview question. How would you handle the growing traffic needs and traffic spikes. I'm curious whether any existing architectural diagram of theirs would highlight a potential failure post-mordem.

Is it a interview question to the MBAs cutting costs at all cost?

Re: The August 17 outage

#624

Post by pdimitar »

okeuro49 wrote: post #551
fsloth wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This I don't understand. If it's not your job, then just ignore the reports. If it's actually critical, someone will put money on the table and then it's a business. And then it's about scheduling and resourcing - also should not burn anyone out. Just because many people have false sense of entitlement as soon as they get a free offering, it does not mean anyone needs to accommodate them.

> If it's not your job, then just ignore the reports. If you have a highly conscientious personality, this is easier said than done.

It's also a great opportunity for character development. Use it for that, and not for trying to overbook yourself to 300%.

You don't owe the world anything at all. If you're conscientious, then give a little -- here and there. Don't turn it into an unpaid job.

Re: The August 17 outage

#625

Post by Good4boothee »

dpweb wrote: post #41

Sorry to suggest this but if they charged everyone say $1/mo. it would absolutely help the massive surge from AI coding they seem to have had. I don't like paying for free stuff but gh certainly worth it.

I am surprised they didn't rollback their change from 2019 when they included up to 5 private repos in free plan. Before that you had to pay to keep your code from being publicly visible.

Re: The August 17 outage

#626

Post by [deleted] »

pelasaco wrote: post #546
blakesterz wrote: post #4

"Since April, monthly commits have grown from 1.4 billion to 2.9 billion. " Wow, that is some incredible growth in a really short time.

this is impressive too "We have since added more than 3 million CPU cores, 120 petabytes of high-speed storage, and significant network capacity"

[deleted]

Re: The August 17 outage

#627

Post by pdimitar »

vincnetas wrote: post #577
fsloth wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This I don't understand. If it's not your job, then just ignore the reports. If it's actually critical, someone will put money on the table and then it's a business. And then it's about scheduling and resourcing - also should not burn anyone out. Just because many people have false sense of entitlement as soon as they get a free offering, it does not mean anyone needs to accommodate them.

Not everyone acts rationally even when knowing that they act irrationally.

Sounds like their problem, not something a SaaS product should dance around.

Yet they kind of did. I've limited participation in my libraries with GitHub's setting that nobody who made an account in the last 6 months can do anything in my repos (after some misguided hustler thought they're an easy target and posted an ad).lp

Time's marching forward though. Wonder what will happen after a few more months. We'll have bot spam accounts that are no longer as fresh.

Re: The August 17 outage

#628

Post by sajithdilshan »

Brian_K_White wrote: post #369
sajithdilshan wrote: post #62

[flagged]

Whos fault is the massive load increase, or their inability to navigate it? Did I iject copilot into every part of github? In fact not only did I not insert it, I have never even used it. Did I move their infrastructure to Azure? Did I sell them to MS? Did I set all the directives and priorities that MS has set on them like telling everyone they must use openai for everything, and then telling them they must stop doi…

This is exactly the entitled attitude I'm talking about. Nobody forced you to use Github for free. Don't like it, use something else. Beggars cannot be choosers

Re: The August 17 outage

#629

Post by philipbjorge »

ozgung wrote: post #508
m4rtink wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much more stuff and growing- what it is actually useful for ? Are we getting actually more done than with previous volumes or is it just all wasted energy?

Has anyone noticed an increase in the quality, performance or capabilities of the software they use?

I'm writing much more secure software and infrastructure (e.g. IAM now gets configured well).

Re: The August 17 outage

#630

Post by jen20 »

stillpointlab wrote: post #363
arn3n wrote: post #78

Everyone suggesting that they simply charge users for commits to drive off AI-heavy users forgets that Github is owned by Microsoft, who has a big incentive to keep having developers use AI. I suspect that Microsoft would even prefer to have Github operate at a loss, if that loss were because all its users were using their models and paying for OpenAI subscriptions to generate the code.

They could do this in a way that lessens external pull requests. For example, bolting co-pilot on to github, or a Codex in the web kind of thing that gives unlimited check ins. It's like how Grok Heavy gives the user X premium or whatever. You charge for the tokens and give the unlimted premium access as a bonus. Basically, bundle it.

> bolting co-pilot on to github

They already did this, no?

Post reply on HN