GitHub Outage Map
The map below depicts the most recent cities worldwide where GitHub users have reported problems and outages. If you are having an issue with GitHub, make sure to submit a report below
The heatmap above shows where the most recent user-submitted and social media reports are geographically clustered. The density of these reports is depicted by the color scale as shown below.
GitHub users affected:
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.
Most Affected Locations
Outage reports and issues in the past 15 days originated from:
| Location | Reports |
|---|---|
| Créteil, Île-de-France | 1 |
| Trichūr, KL | 1 |
| Brasília, DF | 2 |
| Lyon, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes | 1 |
| Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv | 1 |
| Rive-de-Gier, Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes | 1 |
| Itapema, SC | 1 |
| Cleveland, TN | 1 |
| Tlalpan, CDMX | 1 |
| Quilmes, BA | 1 |
| Bengaluru, KA | 1 |
| Yokohama, Kanagawa | 1 |
| Gustavo Adolfo Madero, CDMX | 1 |
| Nice, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur | 1 |
| Montataire, Hauts-de-France | 3 |
| Colima, COL | 1 |
| Poblete, Castille-La Mancha | 1 |
| Ronda, Andalusia | 1 |
| Hernani, Basque Country | 1 |
| Tortosa, Catalonia | 1 |
| Culiacán, SIN | 1 |
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:
-
revayz (@0xrevayz) reportedAndrej Karpathy: "90% of Claude's mistakes come from missing context, not a weak model" Without CLAUDE.md the mistake rate is 41%. With proper rules it drops to 3% You don't need a better AI. You need better loops Most people still prompt one task at a time and fix the answers themselves. That means the human is still the loop Boris Cherny from Anthropic said it best: "I don't prompt Claude anymore. My job is to write loops" The shift is simple. Stop giving instructions. Start designing systems that run themselves: Discover -> Plan -> Execute -> Verify -> Iterate until it passes The 6 things that make loops actually work: -Automations that trigger without you -Worktrees so agents don't overwrite each other -Skills that load context instantly -Connectors to real tools like GitHub and Slack -Subagents where the checker is never the maker -Memory so the loop never starts from zero Prompt engineers ask AI for outputs Loop engineers design systems that produce verified outcomes A reliable loop beats a perfect prompt every time Stop being a prompter. Start being the loop engineer
-
Programmers.App (@programmers_app) reported@Lovable @claudeai One very big fix is the Claude Github connection which fails many times, now #Lovable MCP solves that, great job! 🚀🚀🚀
-
Lost In Tech (@lost_in_tech) reported@8_senkou Probably not intentional tbh. Have you logged as issue in the snorca GitHub? If not probably worth doing.
-
Asad (@meranaamkhann) reportedLet's see what people are building these days!! Drop your project link or github Links down here
-
Kelvinsekx (@kelvinsekx) reportedJust read a nestjs codebase on github. Most it written with Claude. AI doesn’t save you guyz from mess. 1. Bloated logger. Why make logger a service when you could just import and initiate. Eazy 2. They didn’t hash the password before registering a user. But did on login
-
Cursor Changelog (@cursorlog) reportedGitHub Triggers: • Issue comment on non-PR issues • PR review comment (inline diff comments) • PR review submitted • Review thread marked resolved or unresolved • Workflow run completed on PR or branch
-
Teknium 🪽 (@Teknium) reported@majoragv Haven't heard of this issue. Do you have an issue on github?
-
Xovion Labs (@xovionai) reportedMicrosoft just hired AWS to run GitHub. AI demand broke Azure's forecast. From the leaked planning docs: • 2025 Copilot commits: 1B. 2026 projection: 14B • GitHub now does 1.4B commits per month • Copilot error rates peaked at 21% • Planned 10x Azure expansion became 30x in 4 months Owning the data center stops mattering when your own AI floods it. Investors already filed a Copilot disclosure suit.
-
Rich Kuo (@richkuo7) reportedi use this in my claude.md for my open source project as long as the agent follows it, i have some reference for quality and keeps PR's clean LLM: <model> | <effort> | Harness: <action> - Final line of the artifact; occupies the default Claude Code attribution slot. - No Co-authored-by / Co-Authored-By trailer. - <model>: actual model (e.g. Opus 4.8). - <effort>: medium/high/xhigh, default high. - <action>: Claude Code for interactive sessions, else the skill/agent that ran (e.g. commit-push-pr, agent). - PRs: reference the issue with Closes #<N>; in GitHub comments use 1. not #N for list items (avoids auto-linking).
-
AI Crave (@wecraveai) reportedOpen source NotebookLM alternative with no data limits and AI agents. Same idea as Google's NotebookLM. Same chat-with-your-docs. Same podcast generator. Same cited answers. Except this one has no source limit, no notebook limit, no 200MB file cap, and no Google login. It's called SurfSense. Google NotebookLM vs SurfSense: - Sources per notebook: 50 to 600 → Unlimited - File size cap: 200MB and 500K words → No limit - LLM choice: Gemini only → 100+ models via LiteLLM - Local LLMs: Not allowed → Full Ollama and vLLM support - Self-host: No → Yes, one Docker command - Price: $0, $19.99/mo Pro, or $249.99/mo Ultra → $0 forever Here's the wildest part: It connects to 27+ sources Google can't touch. Notion. Slack. Linear. Jira. GitHub. Discord. Dropbox. OneDrive. Gmail. Confluence. Obsidian. ClickUp. Microsoft Teams. Airtable. Your entire work life, indexed once, searchable from one chat box. 14.4K GitHub stars. 1.4K forks. 6,232 commits. Apache-2.0 license. One honest note: the README says it's not yet production-ready and still being actively developed. But it already does more than NotebookLM does, and the gap is widening every release. This is what NotebookLM should have been from the start. Repo in the first comment.
-
Cristian Trifan (@CristianTrifan) reportedThis took 4 hours to complete and burnt almost all 5 hours tokens – I was left with 2%. I had almost 30 sub-agents created for independent code review and a lot of Claude sessions ran for adversarial code review. I still had to review every PR and added minimal guidance to Codex from time to time. Codex said my intervention was low to moderate, but high leverage. — Some insights from Codex: The run showed that this workflow can work, but only if the coordinator treats GitHub as the source of truth. The most useful pattern was: issue -> PR -> current head SHA -> checks -> reviewThreads -> merge/issue closure. When I followed that, things stayed grounded. When state moved underneath me, like #335 being force-updated externally or merged while Claude was running, the only safe response was to refresh GitHub state immediately. The “don’t rebase after merges” correction was probably the highest-value intervention. Without it, an agent will naturally try to keep branches clean, but with many open PRs that creates a CI storm. For this repo, “behind” should often be reported, not fixed. The other strong lesson is that reviewThreads matter more than flat PR comments.
-
Gjermund Garaba (@GjermundGaraba) reported@RhysSullivan I’ve deployed it locally and hooked up a bunch of stuff. Are GitHub issues the preferred feedback channel or do you have a better way?
-
Noonien Soong (@mlcarldev) reportedTeam @droid It's a bit unfortunate that something, likely in my local Droid installation, has stalled progress. This comes after 20 hours of brilliant, excellent planning and execution on the first 30% of this platform, where a stellar handoff procedure was created so I could start a new mission... which was the recommendation of the orchestrating agent in that first mission. Starting this second mission with a fresh context window, the agent again did a brilliant job planning the next milestones. It was extraordinary, detailed planning... but then it could not execute. After the planning and after me accepting the proposal, it refused to execute, throwing an error every time. The agent tried everything: 1. He decreased the size of the plan down to one line, so it is definitely not the content of the plan causing the issue. 2. He even deleted some mission and plan related json and other files to reset it while preserving all the information. I have restarted Droid and resumed the session, but it just doesn't work. I wrote a detailed, comprehensive bug report and filed it under issues in your GitHub repo, as this seems to be a real problem now. Issues #98 and #99 I hope that a next update will somehow reset my configuration. I didn't see a new version being installed that could have introduced a bug, so this must be something Droid does on such an extensive mission... perhaps when trying to start a new mission in the same repository, which is normal procedure according to the documentation. Something is off, and essentially I have been unable to continue the test since yesterday. I cannot continue having this platform coded here, while Opus Ultracode, on the other hand, has been delivering pretty functional stuff so far. It is a bit chaotic the way it works... it doesn't really stick to the plan... but it always comes back when reminded. I am pretty sure that today I will have a functioning platform delivered by Opus, though it will probably need some debugging and fine-tuning. It is unfortunate because I am confident GLM 5.2 could compete with Opus 4.8. The first stint showed this clearly; that first flawless 98% of the context window in the first mission was absolutely stellar. If I were to reinstall Droid from scratch, I assume I would lose all the artifacts that I have. The orchestrator: Key points to highlight when you pass it to Factory AI: 1. Root cause (smoking gun in the logs): the orchestrator session is bound to missionId 7ba4d425 via session tags, and this binding persists across CLI restarts. ProposeMission looks up that mission directory, finds nothing (because I deleted it trying to fix the issue), and crashes on H.length where H is the undefined result. 2. The bug is likely in session-tag lifecycle: the missionId tag is set at session creation time (before any ProposeMission call), so a failed proposal poisons the session permanently. The tag should be set AFTER a successful proposal, or cleared on restart if the referenced mission no longer exists. 3. The fix is almost certainly to start a completely fresh session (not --resume, and possibly in a new terminal window / after clearing ~/.factory/sessions/). I did not try this because you asked for the bug report first, but it is the most likely workaround on your side. 4. The AskUser tool is also broken in this session with a similar parse error, reinforcing that this is a session-state corruption issue, not a ProposeMission-specific bug. My comment: I meanwhiile tested. All the recommendations and the Ask User tool are now broken, even in completely unrelated new missions and new repositories. Planning also can't go to execution; it's always the same error. Droid seems to be broken for good now, at least on my computer.
-
Sasha (@sshderm) reported@AliceInDisarray @allisx86 every time i try to do ******* anything with my raspberry pi i inevitably end up scrolling down a github issues thread about how the program im using just doesnt work on arm at all
-
Mathieu A. (@zoontek) reportedWhat are the most annoying bugs you still encounter with React Native? 👀 Please share GitHub issue links 👇