51–60 of 275 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can't really cite the situation as a problem given their hand in creating and continuing it.
It's hard to talk about "them" as a singular entity. I bet that the "Copilot all the things!!11" faction mostly does not consist of GitHub SREs.
Github has published some incredible usage rate increase numbers, which they ascribe to the rise of agentic coding. At some point, they are going to have to change rate limits, cut free-tier usage, or find some other path to reducing load. It's clear that their infrastructure can't keep up with this significant increase, and it's unlikely that they're going to just absorb the increased costs themselves. Very curious…
GitHub, for example, seems to implement the main repository /pulls page as a search query, which is hinted at by the prefilled search bar and was mostly confirmed last week when the search backend failed and pull requests didn’t load. But it could have been implemented as a plain API call that just loads open pull requests, and that API exists and did not go down.
If GitHub focused a bit on identifying their top 95% of high level operations (page loads including resulting API calls, for example) and making them efficient, I bet they could get a 5x or better reduction in backend load by simplifying them.
(Don’t even get me started on the diff viewer. I realize that much of its awfulness is the horribly inefficient front end, which does not directly load the back end, but I expect there is plenty of room for improvement. The plain git command line features are very fast.)
I have been writing lots of code lately And I still only have local git repository. I do not like why git doesn't have a built in bug or issue tracker and a kanban board or something. I wished Git and Fossil hybrid should have won. I thought about using fossil many times but it seems codex and claude have deeper integration with git. I don't like installing software which keeps growing into infinite feature Monster.…
What's worse, GitHub is widely used as a CI/CD solution, it runs massive amount of build pipelines and test suites. There is a ton of players in this space, too.
GitHub's main value proposition was having all these things in one place, as a convenient web app, for free or for moderate money. So they're crushed by the success of their model.
Github has published some incredible usage rate increase numbers, which they ascribe to the rise of agentic coding. At some point, they are going to have to change rate limits, cut free-tier usage, or find some other path to reducing load. It's clear that their infrastructure can't keep up with this significant increase, and it's unlikely that they're going to just absorb the increased costs themselves. Very curious…
Isn't the data that flows through Github so valuable that they (Microsoft) are happy to eat the cost? I don't have a clear idea how that value can be captured, since it's going to be 90% AI generated code that anyone can scrape (public projects) or can't be used (private projects), so perhaps you're right.
The value is probably in knowing which AI-generated code ends up being pushed or discarded, which can't be derived from public projects. This information can then be used to finetune the next big model so it only generates the "good" code.
At this point, "GH is down" posts are competing with "Newest LLM Hype" for the HN front-page week over week. For my personal project, I've been considering moving everything over to Codeberg. Stability of GH being one reason, but I also like the idea of an alternative that is not strictly tied to a big tech company.
worked for me pushing some commits about 20 minutes ago.