GitHub 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:

• 
  AI Scientist (@AIScientist_X) reported 2 minutes ago

  NEWS: X LANDS FIRST PUBLIC ALGORITHM PR > X OPEN SOURCE SAID SEP 1 THAT AFTER 2 PLUS WEEKS OF DAILY UPDATES IT INTEGRATED A FIRST PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION AND THAT THE CHANGE IS NOW LIVE ON X. > IT SAID THE SMALL UPDATE IS BASED ON GITHUB PULL REQUEST 55. X CLOSED THAT PR AS COMPLETED AFTER LANDING ITS OWN FIX. SOURCE: X OPEN SOURCE

• 
  Prophet Joel (@2happyCSGO) reported 2 minutes ago

  I personally hated Claude because it refused to do almost anything I asked it to do so have no idea of how the speed is but gemini-cli was unusable for non enterprise users. Github CoPilot both GUI and cli is pretty good. Grok Build is what I'm using mostly and not yet had any issues with the speed but I want to go full local asap, scouting for 3090's atm. Just to be able to run "uncensored" models that don't ***** like Claude is reason enough for me to prefer local over Cloud but also cloud is ******* expensive, I have SuperGrok 100$/month and CoPilot Max 100$/month and that is barely enough. I'm trying to make my own Jarvis so I need to build my own RAG, memory, librarian, SRE Agent that understand how to use all tools and I also get crazy new idea's all the time lol Just made my first alpha of a tool that can wipe basically anything you don't want in Windows11. Basically Chris Titus clone but on steroids, this isn't just a debloater, it's a Grim Reaper 💀

• 
  Gustavo Alessandri (@webgus) reported 7 minutes ago

  If you find an error, have an idea, or want to propose an improvement, just open an issue or fork it on Codeberg or GitHub. Contributions are welcome. That’s exactly the point.

• 
  The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃 (@startupideaspod) reported 7 minutes ago

  One of the best skills to install right now is my friend Peter Yang's no AI slop skill. It's an editor. It hunts for the patterns that make writing feel AI generated and strips them out, while trying to preserve your actual voice. The second part is the hard one. Most writing tools make you cleaner and sand off the interesting parts, so everyone ends up sounding the same. You already know the smell. The grammar is fine, the syntax is fine, and it still reads like a keynote from a fake SaaS conference. It writes "it's not x but it's y." It uses "quietly" a lot. Here's how I run it: 1) Install it: npx skills add, then the GitHub link. 2) Write a rough draft yourself. An outline is fine, messy is fine. 3) Get your real points down, the ones only you would make 4) Ask the skill to remove the AI patterns and keep your voice. Step 4 only works if step 2 is real. If you ask AI to write the whole thing, there's no voice left to preserve. If you're building products, you're writing constantly. Tweets, landing pages, cold emails, launch posts, product updates, onboarding copy, investor updates. Nobody replies to say "this was written by AI." They just trust you less and keep scrolling. Write the messy draft, run the skill, then post it.

• 
  rajabi17270.eth (@rajabi17270) reported 10 minutes ago

  @SeismicSys An Ethereum engineer opens an install page expecting a binary download that finishes before the coffee does. Seismic asks for Rust and cargo first, then budgets five to twenty minutes for the build. That gap is the most honest line on the page: you are not installing a tool, you are compiling a fork of the execution layer on your own machine. Three binaries come out of sfoundryup. sforge as the testing framework, sanvil as the local node, ssolc as the compiler. Each shadows a Foundry tool by exactly one letter, and the docs give the mapping outright: forge becomes sforge, anvil becomes sanvil, cast becomes scast. The s is not decoration. The s is a namespace. The s is the migration guide, compressed into one character and carried from the type system all the way up to the binaries sitting on your PATH. Why a fork and not a plugin is the question the install page answers without asking it. Privacy on Seismic lives in the type system, so solc had to become ssolc to understand suint256 and route it to CLOAD and CSTORE instead of SLOAD and SSTORE. Because the compiler changed, the build harness that invokes it changed with it. Because the emitted bytecode carries opcodes standard revm does not implement, the local node had to be rebuilt to execute them, and because each storage slot is a value paired with an is_private flag, the CLI that queries storage had to expect a different answer than Ethereum's. Four forks, each one forced by the layer beneath it. Not a toolchain that was extended. A toolchain that had no choice. The installer itself carries a detail worth reading twice. It is fetched through the GitHub Contents API with an Accept header of application/vnd.github.v3.raw, from the seismic-foundry repository, at ref equals seismic. That ref is a branch name, and a branch name tells you the maintenance posture: the fork lives beside upstream rather than in a codebase that has stopped speaking to its parent. A rebase relationship, not a divorce. You source your shell profile twice during setup, once after the installer lands and once after sfoundryup finishes. Two separate PATH mutations, because the thing that installs and the thing installed arrive at different moments. What survives the fork is more interesting than what changed. sanvil serves localhost:8545 with pre-funded accounts, and the deployment example uses the same well-known development key Foundry users already have in muscle memory, address 0xf39fd6e51aad88f6f4ce6ab8827279cfffb92266. sforge init, sforge test, sforge script with rpc-url, broadcast and private-key flags: identical surface, identical ergonomics. Your scripts port by find and replace. Which makes the two manual steps on the page the most revealing part of it. The first is the editor. The docs say that if you already have the solidity extension installed, you have to disable it while writing Seismic code. That is not a preference. suint256 is not valid Solidity, the s literal suffix is not valid Solidity, and two grammars cannot both claim authority over the same .sol file. The language is a superset. The highlighter cannot be. The second is sforge clean, listed as optional, run inside an existing project's contract directory. Here the collision is on disk: cache and out are not namespaced, so artifacts that solc produced sit in exactly the paths ssolc writes to, which means the failure mode is not a build error but a passing test against bytecode that never saw a shielded type. Optional only if you have no history. The requirements are narrow and stated plainly. x86_64 or arm64, macOS, Ubuntu or Windows, with other Linux distributions marked as possibly working but not officially tested. Note what that list provisions and what it withholds. It gives you the language and the opcodes locally. It does not give you the hardware boundary, since the network's nodes are the ones required to run inside Trusted Execution Environments while sanvil is described only as a local node in the shape of anvil. Local tests can prove your casts compile and your shielded storage routes through CLOAD correctly. They cannot exercise an enclave. So here is the part nobody plans for. Everything that could take the s prefix did, and one character kept two toolchains from colliding across an entire PATH. The editor extension could not take it. The build cache could not take it. Those two are precisely where the page stops describing and starts instructing, which means the friction in a Seismic setup was never in the fork: it is in the two surfaces a naming convention could not reach.

• 
  Ishank (@IshankDev) reported 13 minutes ago

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

• 
  Aayushiii (@stfu_aayushiii) reported 14 minutes ago

  If you're building a project, read this before writing a single line of code. 5 things I learned the hard way: 1. Problem > model Don't start with “How do I use GPT?” Start with “What problem am I solving?” 2. Simple stack > impressive stack If your MVP needs Kubernetes, 6 microservices and an agent swarm, you probably haven't built an MVP. 3. Evaluate before you optimize You can't improve what you can't measure. 4. Build for users, not your GitHub README A technically impressive project nobody can use isn't a product. 5. Ship ugly. Iterate fast. Your first version isn't supposed to be impressive. The biggest mistake? Spending weeks deciding which model to use when you haven't even validated the problem.

• 
  RAVN (@ravnexchange) reported 14 minutes ago

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

• 
  Abdallah Shaban (@AbdallahSh07) reported 18 minutes ago

  @rashed_sahaji @FlutterDev Got it - did you perhaps submit a GitHub issue to help us triage this? It would be tremendously helpful if you can please do that!

• 
  Rituraj (@RituWithAI) reported 19 minutes ago

  🚨 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 — 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 👇

• 
  Kim Burgaard (@kimburgaard) reported 19 minutes ago

  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 — 5, 4, 3, 3, 3, 4, 1, 2 — 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.

• 
  Kun Chen (@kunchenguid) reported 21 minutes ago

  @petergyang yo @myfirstmate peter just told me his skills are all at user level. backpass currently only runs things at project level i want a proposal for making backpass support a user level run. put that into a github issue use fable for peter

• 
  Bearded Printer (@BeardedPrinter) reported 21 minutes ago

  @RedPill_Phil You've gotta go to their github and submit an issue. Make sure to search their issues to ensure you don't submit a duplicate bug

• 
  borrowck-novel (@borrowck_novel) reported 23 minutes ago

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

• 
  CATIRL 🏳️‍⚧️ (@CATIRL_9) reported 25 minutes ago

  @mminhamina Google GitHub "open grind", solves your problem