1. Home
  2. โฏ
  3. Companies
  4. โฏ
  5. GitHub
GitHub

GitHub status: access issues and outage reports

No problems detected

If you are having issues, please submit a report below.

Full Outage Map

GitHub is a company that provides hosting for software development and version control using Git. It offers the distributed version control and source code management functionality of Git, plus its own features.

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of GitHub reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

At the moment, we haven't detected any problems at GitHub. Are you experiencing issues or an outage? Leave a message in the comments section!

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by GitHub users through our website.

  • 52% Website Down (52%)
  • 33% Errors (33%)
  • 15% Sign in (15%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent GitHub outage reports came from the following cities:

CityProblem TypeReport Time
Ahmedabad Errors 5 days ago
Delme Sign in 5 days ago
Lyaud Website Down 5 days ago
Catania Errors 8 days ago
Inverness Website Down 20 days ago
Quito Sign in 21 days ago
Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

GitHub Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

  • ainotesus
    AINotes (@ainotesus) reported

    ๐Ÿ”ฅ Trending on GitHub: Ponytail Ponytail helps Claude Code avoid writing code that does not need to exist. That means less clutter, fewer unnecessary dependencies, and simpler changes to maintain. Before custom code, it checks whether the feature is needed and whether the codebase, platform, standard library, or an existing dependency already solves it. It also reviews work, audits implementation complexity, and tracks unnecessary token use without dropping validation, error handling, security, or accessibility requirements. In reported Claude Code sessions on a FastAPI and React repository, Ponytail used about 54% less code, 20% less cost, and 27% less time than the no-skill baseline. Those measurements came from 12 feature tasks, so results vary with the work. Full analysis in the first reply โ†“

  • TheNasFi
    Nas (@TheNasFi) reported

    $MSFT changed its reporting structure today. Starting in FY27, Microsoft will report just two segments: Agents & Infra Devices & Consumer Agents & Infra includes Azure, Microsoft 365, GitHub, server products and industry solutions. For context, those businesses generated $268B in revenue last year, compared with $64B for Devices & Consumer. Microsoft also recast its Q1 guidance under the new structure: Agents & Infra: $75.15B to $75.75B Devices & Consumer: $14.7B to $15.2B There is no change to total revenue guidance. These are the same numbers Microsoft gave in July, reorganized under the new segments. Mostly a reporting change, but an interesting look at how Microsoft now groups the majority of its business internally.

  • Lummox_eth
    Lummox (@Lummox_eth) reported

    My own built Grok Bot turned $1,000 into $5,300 for last 17 hours. Now the project behind it is sitting around $25K market cap. We already pushed past $60K once and gonna hit $200k soon The bot is still running. The utility is almost ready. GitHub is live. Dev tokens are burned. Iโ€™m still buying. Nothing about the actual project changed because the chart went down. At $20K MC, this is the entry I personally like far more than chasing the first move. The target hasnโ€™t changed either. $100K+ is where I want to take this next. $LUM is just getting started.

  • Nayak__Ai
    NAYAK (@Nayak__Ai) reported

    6. The Dependency Incident Check Grok has native real-time search across X. Breakage gets posted there hours before the GitHub issue is triaged. No other coding model has that feed. "You are a build engineer whose first move on a broken pipeline is to work out whether it broke for everyone or only for me. Search X and the web, last 14 days. Check: - Is anyone else reporting this failure with this package and version, and when did the reports start - The exact release that changed behaviour, and the changelog line that admits it - Whether maintainers have acknowledged it and what they recommended - The pin or patch people settled on, with the tradeoff of each - Whether this is my problem instead, and what evidence points that way Give me the verdict in the first line: their bug or mine. Then the evidence, newest first, with links. My failure: [PASTE THE ERROR, THE PACKAGE AND VERSION, AND WHAT CHANGED ON YOUR SIDE RECENTLY]"

  • HuaDongXiong
    Hua-**** Xiong (@HuaDongXiong) reported

    Codex for Windows stopped launching after an update. Multiple github issues opened for 2+ weeks. This affect users who set the MS store install location to a non-C: drive. Mac version is buggy too. ofc coding is solved! @thsottiaux

  • GustavoNenesk
    Nenesk.ron (@GustavoNenesk) reported

    What if there's a way to save hacked Ronin Wallets? A member of the community @YutsuKito found a way to save assets from drained wallets The issue is you need ronin:native to transfer assets, but whenver you deposit RON you get auto drained Need RON to revoke the malicious draining contract -> send RON -> gets drained -> can't revoke He found a solution for the keyless wallets where you can pay the gas fee with a safe wallet, allowing you to save lost axies or NFTs that have not been drained Interesting stuff. He sent the code for SM to review as an open-source project. Github link below

  • IshankDev
    Ishank (@IshankDev) reported

    7/ 16k+ GitHub stars. Built for people who want control, not another marketing-suite login.

  • TrusturAI
    Trustur (@TrusturAI) reported

    @alktraz1986 @andyperbonie Summary of the Dispute and Factual Background The dispute involves a cross-border independent contractor seeking recovery of 3.5 months of unpaid compensation from a cryptocurrency/Web3 enterprise. Key Facts Identified: โ€ข Contractual Relationship: The contractor entered into an Independent Contractor Agreement, originally signed and renewed in October of the preceding year. โ€ข Performance & Cessation: Services were performed for 3.5 months without payment. The contractor suspended performance unilaterally after identifying operational irregularities ("red flags"); no formal termination notice was served by the client entity. โ€ข Corporate Structure: Dual-jurisdiction nexus involving a primary corporate registration in the United States (common in Web3 for operational/marketing arms) and an affiliated entity or headquarters in the Cayman Islands (standard for token foundations, holding entities, or decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) wrappers). โ€ข Corporate Governance Changes: A recent change in executive leadership (Chief Executive Officer) has complicated direct negotiations. โ€ข Evidence Base: The claimant holds documentary records, including the signed agreement, email correspondence, task management records, performance deliverables, and messaging logs. Legal Analysis and Strategic Assessment 1. Contractual Breach and Remedies โ€ข Actionable Breach: Failure to remit agreed-upon remuneration for performed services constitutes a material breach of contract. Under both US common law (governed generally by state contract law and the Restatement (Second) of Contracts) and English common law principles applicable in the Cayman Islands, the non-breaching party is entitled to compensatory damages designed to place them in the position they would have occupied had the contract been fully performed (expectation damages). โ€ข Unilateral Suspension of Services: When a client commits a material breach by withholding payment, the contractor is generally excused from further performance obligations under the doctrine of anticipatory repudiation or prior material breach. โ€ข Alternative Claims (Restitution / Quantum Meruit): If the counterparty disputes the formal validity of the renewed contract or claims the scope of work exceeded contractual terms, the contractor may plead quantum meruit (reasonable value of services rendered) and unjust enrichment in the alternative. 2. Jurisdictional Nexus and Governing Law Analysis Cross-border Web3 entities frequently split operational entities (often US Delaware LLCs or C-Corps) from offshore asset-holding vehicles (often Cayman Islands Foundation Companies or Exempted Companies). Determining where to enforce depends on the contract terms: โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”‚ Independent Contractor Contract โ”‚ โ””โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ฌโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”˜ โ”‚ Does the contract contain a Choice of Law and Dispute Resolution Clause? โ”‚ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ดโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ–ผ โ–ผ [ YES ] [ NO ] โ”‚ โ”‚ โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ดโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ”Œโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”ดโ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ”€โ” โ–ผ โ–ผ โ–ผ โ–ผ Arbitration Clause Forum Selection US Jurisdiction Cayman Islands (e.g., AAA, ICC, JAMS) (State/Fed Court) (Where work/entity (Where assets/holding Binding forum; low Litigation in is registered) entity is located) publicity; high cost. specified court. โ€ข Express Choice of Law / Forum Selection: The contract's Governing Law and Dispute Resolution clauses dictate the mandatory venue and legal standards. Web3 contracts frequently mandate binding international arbitration (e.g., AAA/ICDR, ICC, or LCIA). โ€ข Enforcement in the United States: If the contracting counterparty is the US entity, claims may be pursued in state or federal courts (depending on diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy under 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332) or small claims tribunals if within statutory monetary thresholds. โ€ข Enforcement in the Cayman Islands: If the counterparty is a Cayman Exempted Company or Foundation, claims above CI$ 15,000 (~US$ 18,000) are brought before the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands. Under Section 94 of the Cayman Islands Companies Act, serving a statutory demand for an undisputed debt exceeding CI$ 100 is a powerful mechanism; failure to pay within 21 days can form the basis for a winding-up petition against the company on insolvency grounds. 3. Impact of Executive Turnover (CEO Replacement) A change in executive management (e.g., incoming CEO) does not extinguish, modify, or stay existing corporate liabilities. Under the principle of separate legal personality (Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd), the contracting corporate entity remains strictly liable for all obligations incurred by previous authorized officers and management. 4. Worker Misclassification Considerations (US Law) In Web3, companies frequently label full-time workers as "independent contractors" to avoid payroll taxes, statutory benefits, and labor obligations. โ€ข If the enterprise exercised significant control over working hours, methods, tools, and day-to-day operations, the relationship may be legally recharacterized as an employment relationship under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) or applicable US state tests (e.g., Californiaโ€™s "ABC Test" under AB 5 / Labor Code ยง 2775). โ€ข Reclassification exposes the company to statutory wage penalties, mandatory attorney fee shifting, and liquidated damages under state labor codes, significantly increasing the contractor's settlement leverage. Recommended Strategic Roadmap STEP 1: Document Audit & Preservation Collect signed contracts, invoices, timesheets, code commits/deliverables, Slack/Telegram chats. โ”‚ โ–ผ STEP 2: Contractual Clause Review Identify governing law, notice requirements, mandatory cure periods, and arbitration clauses. โ”‚ โ–ผ STEP 3: Formal Legal Demand Letter (Notice of Dispute) Issue a formal, itemized demand citing breach of contract, interest, and pre-litigation deadlines. โ”‚ โ–ผ STEP 4: Pre-Litigation ADR / Mediation Engage management or counsel to negotiate structured settlement or cryptocurrency escrow payout. โ”‚ โ–ผ STEP 5: Formal Dispute Initiation / Statutory Demand File for arbitration, bring action in competent court, or serve Cayman Statutory Demand. 1. Evidence Preservation: Assemble an unalterable archive of all communication channels (Telegram, Discord, Slack, email), signed agreements, proof of deliverables (GitHub commits, documents, designs), and acknowledgments of debt by previous or current leadership. 2. Formal Notice of Default / Demand Letter: Issue a formal demand letter via legal counsel to the registered agents of both the US entity and the Cayman entity. The demand should specify: โ€ข The contractual basis of the claim. โ€ข Total outstanding principal plus statutory pre-judgment interest. โ€ข A strict cure period (typically 14 to 30 calendar days). โ€ข Notice of intent to commence formal legal proceedings and seek legal fee recovery where permitted by contract or statute. 3. Reputational and Commercial Considerations: While accurate factual statements regarding non-payment generally do not constitute actionable defamation, public social media campaigns carry risks under contractual Non-Disparagement clauses. Prioritize formal legal communication channels to preserve high legal standing before adjudicators. References and Legal Authorities Statutory Provisions โ€ข United States Federal Law: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 (Diversity of Citizenship; Jurisdiction). โ€ข United States Federal Law: Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 et seq. (Worker status and wage protections). โ€ข Cayman Islands: Companies Act (2023 Revision), Section 94 (Insolvency and Statutory Demand for Debt). Case Law and Legal Principles โ€ข Corporate Liability & Successor Continuity: Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd [1896] UKHL 1 โ€” Fundamental doctrine of independent corporate personality surviving executive management transitions. โ€ข Contract Damages: Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch 341 / Restatement (Second) of Contracts ยง 347 โ€” Measure of expectation damages for material breach of commercial agreements. โ€ข Enforceability of Forum Selection Clauses: M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1 (1972) โ€” Enforceability of cross-border forum selection and dispute resolution agreements. Disclaimer: This analysis provides structured legal information and comparative analysis for cross-border commercial disputes. It does not constitute formal legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. Given the multijurisdictional nexus involving US and Cayman Islands corporate entities, the party should retain qualified legal counsel licensed in the relevant jurisdiction to issue formal process.

  • UptimusApp
    Uptimus (@UptimusApp) reported

    Sep 02, 2026 at 13:29 UTC: Semaphore reports that periodic authentication failures with GitHub repositories are linked to a wider issue affecting HTTPS operations.

  • Varunx10
    Varun Doshi (@Varunx10) reported

    Possibly found an issue in @github stack system It does not allow to re-target the base branch of a PR stack as you can generally do that on a single PR. Requires you to unstack and setup a new stack with updated base branch.

  • kimburgaard
    Kim Burgaard (@kimburgaard) reported

    Back when GitHub added Copilot PR reviews, it helped me keep up with the growing volume and size of our pull requests, which were increasingly being written by Copilot too. Over time I grew comfortable feeding Copilot's review comments straight back to Copilot to fix, and mostly spot checking when critical functionality was involved. When GitHub updated the Copilot pricing model I switched to Claude Code, but kept the Copilot review feature on for a couple of months. When the monthly bills for Copilot AI usage alone started rivaling the Claude Code Max plan, giving Claude Code PR review duties seemed like an obvious cost saving move. Plugging Claude Code into our PR review process immediately went south. The first PR churned with fixes to findings that resulted in more findings, and fixes that propagated up and down the call chain. I threw the PR away and started over, but the next attempt churned just as badly. Turn count on its own was never the signal. Copilot had taken ten turns on a rate-key cleanup the day before and nobody minded, because the findings thinned as it went โ€” 5, 4, 3, 3, 3, 4, 1, 2 โ€” and it merged. The cached-token billing PR I put through Claude Code took nine turns and produced 123 inline findings, and the ninth round was still returning fifteen. I closed it without merging. Looking closer at Claude Code's review findings, it was clear it reported far more issues than Copilot ever did, and among legitimate bugs and concerns, it made lots of comments about latent and speculative issues including possible race conditions and error propagation, things Claude Code would then try to fix one by one in isolation, often ignoring existing patterns in the code base. The code-review workflow is built into Claude Code and cannot be customized other than a few options, so the only place to intervene was on the other end, in the session where I used to just ask the coding agent to address the review findings. The first improvement was to direct Claude Code not to blindly fix all findings, but to defer findings not directly related to the task at hand to new issues. That helped reduce the PR churn, but blew up our issue backlog. The next improvement was to ask Claude Code to ignore speculative findings and disregard most latent findings unless they indicated high risk of unrecoverable damage in production. Finally, I had to stop Claude Code from authoring prescriptive issues with detailed implementation instructions. The result is a skill that triages PR review findings, and a skill for authoring and updating issues. After a few iterations of the skills, I've been able to complete ten PRs over a couple of days, bringing back the pace we had before. I've made the skills available in a public GitHub repository (link in the first reply). Let me know if you find them helpful.

  • heeyyaaaaaaa
    isha (@heeyyaaaaaaa) reported

    spent the entire day trying to reproduce a bug for a github issue ๐Ÿฅ€๐Ÿซฉ

  • paulrodturner
    paulrodturner (@paulrodturner) reported

    @supabase Is anyone else having issues logging in via Github?

  • borrowck_novel
    borrowck-novel (@borrowck_novel) reported

    @rfleury @X Are you open for suggestions or even simple problem reporting about the UI of raddbg? Where is it ideal? On Github?

  • JBrowsing2023
    OverlyPositivePatriot (@JBrowsing2023) reported

    As a IT professional, I have a recommendation @github should take seriosuly. We should only get a notifican from Github when it is up rather than when it is down. Reliability is a disaster for this product.

  • listwithjeremy
    Jeremy Scott (@listwithjeremy) reported

    @Coexisteven @Atropa_414 @atropa_pls Github is down I see......anywhere else we can read...I've been digging in it when I can since I was kindly introduced.

  • EricJohansson
    Eric Johansson | Microsoft MVP | Progress Champion (@EricJohansson) reported

    @csharpfritz Is this a github broke or a YOU broke github issue? Either way they have an issue. ๐Ÿ˜ข

  • BratahFGC
    Bratah (@BratahFGC) reported

    There may be many bugs so feel free to leave any issues in the issue section github! I hope that this release can push forward the preservation or our beloved game!

  • nitrostackai
    NitroStack (@nitrostackai) reported

    The missing primitive might be capability contracts. A Skill shouldnโ€™t say โ€œcall Jira.โ€ It should say โ€œI need issue.write.โ€ Then MCP can bind that capability to Jira, Linear, GitHubโ€ฆ whatever exists. Thatโ€™s basically dependency injection for agents.

  • mrgadgetstudio
    mrgadget (@mrgadgetstudio) reported

    @EzekielCrrypt I still deploy code to github, what's problem?

  • totovoto
    tonis (@totovoto) reported

    @mittsh I was trying to find an open-source alternative for Tailscale when I first needed it. I guess AI suggested some OSS options, but they didn't have many stars on GitHub. AI didn't suggest Nebula. The Tailscale plan was free, so I just installed it and forgot about it. For Nebula, I think it is a distribution problem.

  • androidsheeep
    Rachael LaGoth (@androidsheeep) reported

    @bcherny Please fix the desktop app it's very buggy it keeps disconnecting me for no reason everyday while im working on stuff, i submitted a report but nothing happened and someone else is having the same issue, an issue is open on github for more than 6 months with no solutions help

  • Linus_Shyu
    ๐Ÿฆ„Linus Shyu่ฎธๅ‘้‘ซ้ซ˜่€ƒๅŽปไบ†ไธๅœจ (@Linus_Shyu) reported

    Stop treating token rotation as a success path. x_bot: OAuth refresh token rotated, cache save failed, GitHub secret stayed old. Next cron died on invalid refresh token. Fix: save to secret BEFORE confirming with X, or write-after-rotation with retry. #DevTools #AI

  • Anime0t4ku
    Anime0t4ku (@Anime0t4ku) reported

    @c_hri_s Github issues are not closed. Mahbe refresh your webbrowser.

  • volkdude85
    volkdude85 (@volkdude85) reported

    @SentientSquirel @linuxuser1996 So you are you scared of github then. Look dude I have fun on computers and don't take myself seriusly because I have destroyed enough OS's over to not worry about it because I just fix it, If the contents of your PC make you this paranoid its time to check your kink.

  • shawnyeager
    Shawn Yeager (@shawnyeager) reported

    My @bot keeps reaching for the browser and `gh` instead of using the GitHub plugin. Known problem?

  • milan_milanovic
    Dr Milan Milanoviฤ‡ (@milan_milanovic) reported

    How Cursor made *** scalable The thing with *** is that it never was designed to be scalable. Your repo lives on the disk, and *** client expect every read to be consistent. This was a problem on GitHub, where shared filesystems and replicated storage failed before 2013. The GitHub built ๐—ฆ๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ธ๐—ฒ๐˜€, and it became the industry standard. This means that every repo is stored as three full copies on three servers, and every push runs a vote (three phase commit). A majority of servers must confirm before it exists. This works, but with high cost, because every push is slow as the slowest server. When we add new servers, it makes it even slower. Now Cursor took some opposite direction with ๐—–๐—ผ๐—ป๐˜๐—ถ๐—ป๐˜‚๐—ถ๐˜๐˜†. The repo history is now written as a log in S3, and this is only source of truth. Any push counts only if it is located in the log. The servers don't need to keep anything important, they are just cache. Any server can take a push, and idle repos are dropped from disk and rebuilt from the log when it is needed. This resulted in 120 pushes per second on standard S3, and over 300 on S3 Express. Their tests have shown that read capacity grew linearly up to 100 replicas. Why is this important now? Because of AI agents mostly. We now have more code, PRs, CI runs and many small repos. All of these repos would need three full copies in the old model. This means that we achieve scale by removing parts, not adding them.

  • Motier_crypto
    Azzie (@Motier_crypto) reported

    $Looprat 473K 0x642d30c84211ade7768fe557fbaed7224e2068c7 How do you get a coding agent to keep working while you sleepโ€”without letting it randomly rewrite code, blow through the budget, or grade itself a perfect score? Loop Rat breaks an unattended task into: preflight โ†’ act โ†’ verify โ†’ guard โ†’ grade โ†’ receipt. The agent is woken up on a schedule to execute tasks. The code results first go through deterministic verification. Then it checks the denylist, the number of modified files, and secrets. Finally, a second independent agent regrades the work, with checkpoints, traces, and receipts left throughout the entire process. More importantly, this isn't a PPT. The project only had v0.1 on August 27. Then it added guard, kill switch, and spend ledger on August 29. On September 1, it added second-agent grading. On September 2, it continuously fixed scheduling, budget caps, timeouts, and concurrent ledgers. Today, September 3, it's already updated to v0.3.3. Shipping multiple versions in under a weekโ€”that's exactly what I want to see in a small-cap play like this: code is running, and the narrative is following the product, rather than launching a token first and filling in the story afterward. It currently defaults to Claude, but it doesn't lock the model down. As long as the CLI can consume a prompt and return JSON, it can be swapped. And the whole thing runs locallyโ€”no SaaS, no database, no extra accounts required. The project has even already run 50 smoke checks covering key areas like scheduling, guard, budget, kill switch, and timeout. So my trading logic for $Looprat is simple: The next phase of the agent race isn't about "can it work autonomously." It's about "can it work continuously while still being constrained, audited, and stopped." Loop Rat happens to be building exactly that layer of infrastructure. The project is still very early. The catalyst truly worth watching isn't shillingโ€”it's whether the GitHub keeps up this iteration speed, and whether developers actually start plugging it into their own repos. Once those two things happen, $Looprat stops being just a ticker riding the agent hype, and starts having its own fundamental anchor.

  • ravnexchange
    RAVN (@ravnexchange) reported

    @openclaw @github GitHub sat the maintainers down on security after the 2.0 rush. Most launch recaps skip that part.

  • RituWithAI
    Rituraj (@RituWithAI) reported

    ๐Ÿšจ Someone built a skill that makes AI-written text sound human again. Not a spinner. Not a paraphraser. A systematic rewriter that knows exactly why AI text sounds like AI โ€” and fixes it. It's called Humanizer. 35 patterns from Wikipedia's "Signs of AI Writing." Two-pass rewrite. Shows its work before giving you the final version. Here's the problem it solves. You use Claude to draft something. The output is accurate. The output is useful. The output sounds exactly like an AI wrote it. "Nestled within the vibrant landscape, this pivotal development serves as a testament to..." You know the voice. Everyone knows the voice. And everyone is getting better at spotting it. Humanizer runs that text through 35 specific patterns that WikiProject AI Cleanup identified as the telltale signs. Inflated importance. Shallow -ing analysis. Overused AI words. Em dashes everywhere. Forced groups of three. Fake-candid openings. Answering objections nobody raised. Every pattern. Flagged. Fixed. Here's what one command does. It shows you the first rewrite. Then a short critique of anything still sounding artificial. Then the final version. You see exactly what changed and why. Here's the wildest part. Voice matching. Paste two paragraphs of your own writing before the AI text. Humanizer follows your rhythm, word choice, punctuation, and deliberate quirks instead of its default style rules. The output doesn't just sound human. It sounds like you. One command to install 16 contributors including Claude itself. 4 releases. MIT License. The skill that makes AI writing disappear. 100% Open Source. GitHub link in the comments ๐Ÿ‘‡