frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Security releases of JupyterHub, Auth0, LTI authenticators

https://discourse.jupyter.org/t/ann-security-releases-of-jupyterhub-auth0-lti-authenticators/38480
1•julienchastang•13s ago•0 comments

An effect notation based on with-clauses and blocks

https://blog.yoshuawuyts.com/a-with-based-effect-notation
1•lukastyrychtr•27s ago•0 comments

The Decline of the West [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwtVOgHJU7I
1•joe_mamba•54s ago•0 comments

QuantumForge – Browser-based quantum chemistry simulations on IBM Quantum

https://quantumforgelabs.io
1•isurfclouds•1m ago•1 comments

Cost Effective SOTA Vulnerability Detection with Open Source RL

https://depthfirst.com/post/dfs-mini1-agent
1•ejcho•2m ago•0 comments

Kaggle launches auto exams for zero-setup agent evals of prompt injection, etc.

https://www.kaggle.com/blog/standardized-agent-exams
1•art82135•4m ago•0 comments

The Nuclear Safety Protections in Federal Crosshairs

https://undark.org/2026/03/31/federal-nuclear-safety-protections/
1•EA-3167•4m ago•0 comments

I published the architecture Anthropic is now shippingstamped proof

https://nicholasjbogaert.substack.com/p/i-published-the-architecture-anthropic
2•nicbogaert•5m ago•0 comments

TMZ Has a New Obsession: Vacationing Members of Congress

https://www.notus.org/congress/tmz-congress-coverage-dhs-shutdown-tabloid-paparazzi
2•OrangePilled•6m ago•0 comments

Functional hierarchy of the human neocortex across the lifespan

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10219-x
1•bookofjoe•6m ago•0 comments

Redesign any website with four AI models side by side

https://shuffle.dev/ai-website-redesign
3•avoc777•8m ago•0 comments

Cisco source code stolen in Trivy-linked dev environment breach

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/cisco-source-code-stolen-in-trivy-linked-dev-envir...
4•_____k•10m ago•0 comments

Scaling Laws: The Lawfare Playlist on AI [video]

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9f-8IUHQF3lNz1hhIIU1AyQM9M6hmP4m
1•verdverm•10m ago•0 comments

Ministack (Replacement for LocalStack)

https://ministack.org/
3•kerblang•12m ago•0 comments

APS: Open specification for AI agent policies

https://agentpolicyspecification.github.io
1•pascalwilbrink•14m ago•0 comments

Show HN: AI writes the code, but who answers in the interview?

https://sharpskill.dev/en
1•GiornoJojo•14m ago•0 comments

Amazon pulled Kindle update 5.19.3 a few days after release

https://old.reddit.com/r/kindle/comments/1s7lo50/5193_officially_back_to_5192_on_kindle_website/
2•seam_carver•15m ago•0 comments

OpenAI Valued at $852B After Completing $122B Round

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-31/openai-valued-at-852-billion-after-completing-...
2•matthieu_bl•16m ago•0 comments

Top Five (Wrong) Reasons You Don't Have Testers (2000)

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/30/top-five-wrong-reasons-you-dont-have-testers/
3•Austin_Conlon•16m ago•0 comments

Codex Plugin for Claude Code

https://community.openai.com/t/introducing-codex-plugin-for-claude-code/1378186
1•grodriguez100•18m ago•0 comments

Show HN: Fixing Claude Code's amnesia with persistent memory

https://github.com/agynio/claude-map-reduce-memory
1•NBenkovich•21m ago•2 comments

OpenHarness – Composable TypeScript SDK for building powerful agent harnesses

https://www.open-harness.dev
2•MaxGfeller•21m ago•1 comments

How I Fixed My Headaches

https://chillphysicsenjoyer.substack.com/p/how-i-fixed-my-headaches
4•sebg•22m ago•0 comments

CLaudeCode Feed Keywords

https://github.com/chatgptprojects/claude-code/blob/642c7f944bbe5f7e57c05d756ab7fa7c9c5035cc/src/...
1•oriettaxx•22m ago•0 comments

Open Swarm, open source platform for running AI agents in parallel

https://github.com/openswarm-ai/openswarm
2•ciregenz10•27m ago•1 comments

A personal knowledge graph builder, applied to Bible study

https://www.bibletrace.com
3•vandervs•27m ago•1 comments

Which Countries Depend the Most on Persian Gulf Oil and Gas

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/03/23/business/energy-environment/oil-importers-middle-e...
2•speckx•28m ago•0 comments

Pidgin 3.0 Alpha 1 (2.95.0) has been released

https://discourse.imfreedom.org/t/pidgin-3-0-alpha-1-2-95-0-has-been-released/378
2•rw_grim•30m ago•0 comments

Sanity-checking ML metrics before trusting them

https://predictly.cloud
1•johndreynolds•31m ago•0 comments

America Got a Little More Religious. No, Really.

https://www.graphsaboutreligion.com/p/america-got-a-little-more-religious
3•sebg•32m ago•1 comments
Open in hackernews

GitHub's Historic Uptime

https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/
265•todsacerdoti•1h ago

Comments

zja•1h ago
PR merging broken right now https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/ml7wplmxbt5l
_air•1h ago
Do we have metrics for the uptime of other major services? Would be interesting to see if this is just a GitHub problem or industry-wide.
verdverm•59m ago
Bitbucket Cloud incident history: https://bitbucket.status.atlassian.com/history

Though I will be the first to say I don't fully trust it based on the flakey git clone errors we see in CI.

josefritzishere•1h ago
That's pretty stark.
BadBadJellyBean•1h ago
I feel like by now GitHub has a worse downtime record than my self hosted services on my single server where I frequently experiment, stop services or reboot.
agilob•1h ago
It's ok because we're still paying for it. QoS degradation is worth it. No need to have 99.999% then you can have 90.84% and still people to pay for it.
verdverm•21m ago
Those electricity savings can better used to fuel the token bonfire
marcosdumay•17m ago
It does have a worse downtime record than my tiny VPS that has a recurrent packet routing problem and keeps going offline. Measurably so.
alberth•1h ago
Unsolicited feedback ... changing the y-axis to be hours (not % uptime) might be more intuitive for folks to understand.

The data is there, you just have to hover over each data point.

simlevesque•1h ago
It could even be both % and offline hours per year. To me the percentage is simpler to understand.
dewey•1h ago
I remember a lot of unicorn pages back in the days. Maybe the status page was just not updated that regularly back then?
imglorp•1h ago
I think the unicorn is only for web pages. Things like git api services might be broken independently (and often are!) and they might show up on the status page after some time.
mcherm•1h ago
The significance of the changeover would be much more impactful if the chart showed a longer history.
rvz•1h ago
I guess "centralizing everything" to GitHub was never a good idea and called it 6 years ago. [0]

Looking at this now, you might as well self host and you would still get better uptime than GitHub.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22867803

SamuelAdams•1h ago
It could also be that they have more customers / clients now, or offer more capabilities.
phillipcarter•1h ago
FWIW if people are looking for a reason why, here's why I think it's happening: https://thenewstack.io/github-will-prioritize-migrating-to-a...
nmaleki•43m ago
You'd think they'd do all the testing elsewhere and use a much shorter window of time to implement Azure after testing. I don't think this fully explains over 6 years of poor uptime.
hadlock•24m ago
The fact that even they struggle with github actions is a real testimate to the fact that nobody wants to host their own CD workers.
llama052•25m ago
It's absolutely this. Our Azure outages correlate heavily with Github outages. It's almost a meme for us at this point.
mholt•1h ago
Even better IMO is this status page: https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/

"The Missing GitHub Status Page" with overall aggregate percentages. Currently at 90.84% over the last 90 days. It was at 90.00% a couple days ago.

skipants•1h ago
These are two pages telling two different things, albeit with the same stats. The information is presented by OP in a way to show the results of the Microsoft acquisition.
montroser•1h ago
It has been pretty rough. Their own numbers report just a single `9` for Actions in Feb 2026 with 98% uptime. But that said -- I don't get the 90% number.

Anecdotally, it seems believable that 1 in 50 times (2%) in Feb that Actions barfed. Which is not very nice, but it wasn't at 1 in 10 times (10%).

verdverm•1h ago
It looks like the aggregate stats are more of a venn diagram than an average. So if 1/N services are down, the aggregate is considered down. I don't think this is an accurate way to calculate this. It should be weighted or in some way show partial outages. This belief is derived from the Google SRE book, in particular chapters 3 (embracing risk) and 4 (service level objectives)

https://sre.google/sre-book/embracing-risk/

https://sre.google/sre-book/service-level-objectives/

mort96•32m ago
I mean I think it's useful. It answers the question, "what percentage of the time can I rely on every part of GitHub to work correctly?". The answer seems to be roughly 90% of the time.
naniwaduni•27m ago
Nobody cares about every part of GitHub working correctly. I mean, ok, their SREs are supposed to, but tabling the question of whether that's true: if tomorrow they announced a distributed no-op service with 100% downtime, you should not have the intuition that the overall availability of the platform is now worse.
verdverm•24m ago
I don't use half of the services, the answer is no so straight forward

https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/

ablob•26m ago
If you're using all services, then any partial outage is essentially a full outage. Of course, you can massage the numbers to make it look nicer in the way you described but the conservative approach is better for the customers. If you insist, one could create this metric for selected services only to "better reflect users".

That being said, even when looking at the split uptimes, you'd have to do a very skewed weighting to achieve a number with more than one 9.

marcosdumay•25m ago
That's how you count uptime. You system is not up if it keeps failing when the user does some thing.

The problem here is the specification of what the system is. It's a bit unfair to call GH a single service, but it's how Microsoft sells it.

formerly_proven•12m ago
In a nutshell, why would the consumer care (for the SLO) care about how the vendor sliced the solution into microservices?
fontain•1h ago
An aggregate number like that doesn’t seem to be a reasonable measure. Should OpenAI models being unavailable in CoPilot because OpenAI has an outage be considered GitHub “downtime”?
fwip•53m ago
I think reasonable people can disagree on this.

From the point of view of an individual developer, it may be "fraction of tasks affected by downtime" - which would lie between the average and the aggregate, as many tasks use multiple (but not all) features.

But if you take the point of view of a customer, it might not matter as much 'which' part is broken. To use a bad analogy, if my car is in the shop 10% of the time, it's not much comfort if each individual component is only broken 0.1% of the time.

remus•27m ago
> But if you take the point of view of a customer, it might not matter as much 'which' part is broken. To use a bad analogy, if my car is in the shop 10% of the time, it's not much comfort if each individual component is only broken 0.1% of the time.

Not to go too out of my way to defend GH's uptime because it's obviously pretty patchy, but I think this is a bad analogy. Most customers won't have a hard reliability on every user-facing gh feature. Or to put it another way there's only going to be a tiny fraction of users who actually experienced something like the 90% uptime reported by the site. Most people are in practice are probably experienceing something like 97-98%.

mememememememo•25m ago
Or if your kettle is not working the house is considered not working?
wang_li•3m ago
A better analogy is if one bulb in the right rear brake light group is burnt out. Technically the car is broken. But realistically you will be able to do all the things you want to do unless the thing you want to do is measure that all the bulbs in your brake lights are working.
mort96•30m ago
As long as they brand it as a part of GitHub by calling it "GitHub Copilot" and integrate it into the GitHub UI, I think it's fair game.
mememememememo•26m ago
What is Google's uptime (including every single little thing with Google in the name)?
mort96•15m ago
I don't think that's a fair comparison. Google Maps, Google Calendar, Google Drive, Google Search, Google Chrome, Google Ads, etc. are all clearly completely different products which have very little to do each other, they're just made by the same company called Google.

GitHub is a different situation. There's one "thing" users interact with, github.com, and it does a bunch of related things. Git operations, web hooks, the GitHub API (and thus their CLI tool), issues, pull requests, Actions; it's all part of the one product users think of as "GitHub", even if they happen to be implemented as different services which can fail separately.

shrinks99•1h ago
I got Claude to make me the exact same graph a few weeks ago! I had hypothesized that we'd see a sharp drop off, instead what I found (as this project also shows) is a rather messy average trend of outages that has been going on for some time.

The graph being all nice before the Microsoft acquisition is a fun narrative, until you realize that some products (like actions, announced on October 16th, 2018) didn't exist and therefore had no outages. Easy to correct for by setting up start dates, but not done here. For the rest that did exist (API requests, Git ops, pages, etc) I figured they could just as easily be explained with GitHub improving their observability.

irishcoffee•1h ago
Github actions needs to go away. Git, in the linux mantra, is a tool written to do one job very well. Productizing it, bolting shit onto the sides of it, and making it more than it should be was/is a giant mistake.

The whole "just because we could doesn't mean we should" quote applies here.

psini•1h ago
But GitHub actions is not Git?
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF•1h ago
The same philosophy would suggest that running some other command immediately following a particular (successful) git command is fine; it is composing relatively simple programs into a greater system. Other than the common security pitfalls of the former, said philosophy has no issue with using (for example) Jenkins instead of Actions.
padjo•17m ago
It feels like they launched actions and it quickly turned out to be an operations and availability nightmare. Since then, they've been firefighting and now the problems have spread to previously stable things like issues and PRs
yakkomajuri•1h ago
I mean I'm as annoyed as the next person about the outages but I'm not sure correlating with the Microsoft acquisition tells the whole story? GitHub usage has been growing massively I'd imagine?
bob1029•1h ago
I'm convinced one of my org's repos is just haunted now. It doesn't matter what the status page says. I'll get a unicorn about twice a day. Once you have 8000 commits, 15k issues, and two competing project boards, things seem to get pretty bad. Fresh repos run crazy fast by comparison.
fishtoaster•1h ago
Is the pre-2018 data actually accurate? There seem to have been a number of outages before then: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateEnd=1545696000&dateRange=custom&...

Maybe that's just the date when they started tracking uptime using this sytem?

OlivOnTech•48m ago
Data comes from the official status page. It may be more a marketing/communication page than an observability page (especially before selling)
robshippr•1h ago
This at least makes me feel like I am not going crazy when I say "Github used to be much more reliable before Microsoft bought them"
starkparker•1h ago
The biggest spikes are Github Actions, starting November 2019. They didn't go GA until November 13, 2019: https://siliconangle.com/2019/11/13/github-universe-announce...
theaicloser•1h ago
interesting to see the correlation between outages and major feature launches — the big ones almost always coincide with infrastructure changes rather than random failures. Would be curious to overlay this with GitHub's engineering blog posts about what was happening behind the scenes.
hk__2•1h ago
It’s biaised to show this without the dates at which features were introduced. A lot of the downtimes in the breakdown are GitHub Actions, which launched in August 2019; so yeah what a surprise there was no Actions downtime before because Actions didn’t exist.
cuu508•57m ago
You can click on "Breakdown" and then on "Actions" to hide it.
mbauman•54m ago
Even worse, those features show "100% uptime" pre-existence on the breakdowns page too.
voxic11•25m ago
Check the breakdown page. Like yes the magnitude is reduced obviously for individual services. But they all show the same trend.
fontain•1h ago
GitHub is 100x the size today with 100x the product surface area. Pre-Microsoft GitHub was just a git host. Now, whether GitHub should have become what it is today is a fair question but to say “GitHub” is less stable today vs. 10 years ago ignores the significant changes. Also, much of these incidents are limited to products that are unreliable by nature, e.g: CoPilot depends on OpenAI and OpenAI has outages. The entire LLM API industry expects some requests to fail.

GitHub’s reliability could stand to be improved but without narrowing down to products these sort of comparisons are meaningless.

tln•55m ago
The article provides a way to do just that - click breakdown then you can deselect any product areas.

Just the Git operations show way more instability post acquisition.

bigfatkitten•39m ago
> Pre-Microsoft GitHub was just a git host.

And even just that aspect of the service is now extremely unreliable. If outages in the LLM side can cause that to break, that would indicate some serious architectural problems.

darkhorn•1h ago
When I say that Microsoft writes very bad code some people get offended. For example for Azure Event Hubs they have almost no documentation and Java libraries that mostly do not run.
qrush•1h ago
hot take: I would accept ads under every PR comment in GitHub if we could get back to 3 or 4 nines of reliability.
verdverm•56m ago
I will chime in that Jira and Bitbucket have drastically improved performance and reliability over this same time period. It actually feels snappy and they seem to listen to feedback.
redwood•56m ago
I wonder if they got moved to Azure in 2019?
tonymet•47m ago
Nearly all the variance is from Actions, a product that didn’t exist beforehand.

It’s despicable to see everyone punching down on GitHub. Even under Microsoft they’ve continued to provide an invaluable and free service to open source developers .

And now , while vibe coders smother them to death, we ridicule them . Shameful , really

EdNutting•15m ago
I was with you until your comment about vibe coders. Microsoft paid for and brought this vibe coding hell upon themselves. GitHub Copilot, investment in/partnership with OpenAI, and everything else they’ve done to enshitify software and the internet.

If it brings them down, they’ve only themselves to blame. More likely it’ll just hasten the end of free public repos, which will be a shame, but we’ll find other ways to share code that aren’t reliant on one semi-benevolent megacorp.

tonymet•8m ago
The smothering would happen with or without Copilot. This just sounds like an excuse to be ungrateful .

I hope GitHub shuts down free tier , maybe developers will finally be grateful .

llama052•44m ago
Nearly every time Github has an outage, Azure is having issues also.

Actually the last 4-5 outages from Github, Our Azure environments have issues (that they rarely post on the status page) and lo and behold I'll notice that Github is also having the same problem.

I can only assume most of this is from the Azure migration path. Such an abysmal platform to be on. I loathe it.

Looks like there's an internal service health bulletin:

Impact Statement: Starting at 19:53 UTC on 31 Mar 2026, some customers using the Key Vault service in the East US region may experience issues accessing Key Vaults. This may directly impact performing operations on the control plane or data plane for Key Vault or for supported scenarios where Key Vault is integrated with other Azure services.

Honestly all of the key vault functions are offline for us in that region. Just another day in paradise.

Also the fact that the azure status page remains green is normal. Just assume it's statically green unless enough people notice.

wiseowise•43m ago
Programming is a solved problem, btw.
otterley•27m ago
I'm not a GitHub apologist, but that graph isn't at scale, at all. It's massively zoomed in, with a lower band of 99.5%. It makes it look far worse than it is.
verdverm•23m ago
It's an uptime chart and shouldn't need to show much more than the 99% range.

If you started the y-axis at zero, you wouldn't see much of anything. Logarithmic scale would still be a bit much imo.

TimLeland•26m ago
How much of the downtime is due to all the AI code being committed?
barryhennessy•23m ago
It’s actually great to see a living example of how sensitive users* are to what to a lay person would look like a small amount of downtime.

The fact that we’re all talking about it, and not at all surprised, is a great example we can take when making the case for more 9’s of reliability.

* well, very technical power users.

landsman•21m ago
It is ridiculous how company owned by Microsoft, making non sense money on Azure, is let to die like this. That's have to be a soft of plan or something. So sad to watch it.
topbanana•7m ago
Historical *

https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/everything-youve-eve...