Reddit 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.

Reddit Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Akari Rini 🌐⭐ (@akaririnii) reported 4 minutes ago

  @Necromel211736 i aspire to be as tech savvy as you one day!! random reddit tech problem forums are my savior

• 
  ARIA (@attntion_s55ker) reported 4 minutes ago

  there are so many ppl on reddit who are like this is a terrible med that ruined my life and i know it's just reddit but I DONT KNOW ANYONE ELSE WHO HAS INSIGHT ABT THIS

• 
  Amin (@eCom_Amin) reported 6 minutes ago

  fable 5.1 is insanely CRACKED at finding winning google ads angles to scale your brand past $1m/mo research capacities literally DOUBLED so here's every prompt you'll need to reverse-engineer competitors' funnels and rip some banger gads based on it: (actually run them all rn, don't just save this) 1. load the brain before you ask it anything the research is only as sharp as the context. upload: - pdps - reviews - website - funnel pages - competitors - report CSVs - brand docs - ICP info - winners - losers literally everything then run this: "act as the angle research lead for this brand. read everything uploaded and build a working profile: ICP segments ranked by revenue, the pain points in the customer's own words, the objections ordered by how often they appear, the proof we already own, and the beliefs a buyer must hold before purchasing. do not propose angles yet. summarise what you found, then tell me what context is MISSING" that last instruction is the whole game. prompt engineering is cope just have claude tell you what he needs from you and give it to him. anybody who disagrees just loves to overcomplicate things. 2. mine untapped databases that semrush misses prompt: "search reddit threads, quora answers, amazon reviews and Q&A sections, youtube comments on competitor and category videos, tiktok comments, trustpilot, and niche forums for people discussing [PROBLEM CATEGORY]. extract VERBATIM language, never paraphrase. for each goldmine you find, give me this: the quote, the pain underneath it, what they already tried, why it failed them, the outcome they want, and the emotional state behind it" paraphrasing is how angles end up sounding like ai slop. the whole value is in knowing your ICP's EXACT words and repeating them on ads. 3. reverse engineer every competitor funnel end to end "research [COMPETITOR 1, 2, 3]. use google ads transparency center, meta ad library, their landing pages, checkout flow and email capture. for each: every live ad and where it routes, the landing page TYPE, the hero promise, the mechanism they claim, the proof they lead with, the objections handled and in what order, the offer and guarantee, and what they are NOT saying" then: "for each competitor page, tell me which awareness level it was built for. then identify which of their traffic is landing on the wrong page type" this is how you find gaps in your competitors strategies that you can capitalize on 4. diagnose market sophistication BEFORE choosing an angle this is the step 9 out of 10 brands skip and it decides whether your angle has any chance: "assess the market sophistication level for [CATEGORY] using schwartz's 5 stages. analyse competitor ads and landing pages as evidence. stage 1 means nobody has made the claim yet. stage 2 means claims are escalating. stage 3 means mechanism differentiation has started. stage 4 means mechanisms are competing. stage 5 means the market is exhausted and identification wins. tell me which stage we're in, the evidence, and what type of angle still works at this stage" if your category is at stage 4, a bigger promise does nothing. every competitor already made one. if you're operating in stage 5, the mechanism is exhausted too, and the strategy has to shift again your ad is only good if it resonates with the market it operates in 5. score every angle against awareness and funnel stage "from the research, generate 15 google ad angles for my brand. for each: the awareness level it serves, the funnel stage it belongs in, the sophistication stage it's valid at, whether it's validated by competitors or white space, the proof required to run it, and the funnel type it should be tested through. rank by expected impact and flag any we lack proof to support" an angle without proof is a claim. claude will rank those last 6. map the keywords to the angles, not the products "build the keyword universe for [BRAND] using the customer language and competitor research. split into branded, competitor, problem-aware symptom queries, solution-aware category queries, comparison, use-case, and occasion. tag each with awareness level, the angle it pairs with, the funnel type it routes to, and the campaign that should own it" this will make everything nice and organized 7. turn the research into the campaign plan "turn everything above into a 30-day google ads launch plan for this specific brand, its AOV, margin structure and market sophistication stage. for each campaign, give me: the angle it carries, the keyword cluster, the landing page type, the creative direction, and the signal that decides whether it scales, holds, or gets cut. separate must-launch from phase 2 tests" then: "tell me which 3 angles to test first and why, given our sophistication stage and the proof we currently own" and that's literally it your competitors are testing angles with fat budgets while you analyze it all, learn from their mistakes, and (ethically) rip their winners with a unique twist and if you want me to audit your brand's google ads angles using this system and show you how we'd capitalize on the winning ones... DM me "OPP"

• 
  Anglo-Distributist 🇻🇦 (@Catholic_Briton) reported 11 minutes ago

  @CrewkerneMan Argue like you're left-wing 1. Pretend not to understand the point, no matter how obvious 2. Make your opponent waste time explaining obvious things so they can't move on 3. Equivocate, equivocate, equivocate 4. Make a reddit-tier gotcha & sit down like you won the argument

• 
  Mohamed irfan (@heyIrfan) reported 12 minutes ago

  If I had to build a SaaS from $0 today, I wouldn't start by writing code. I'd start by talking to the market. Imagine you have an idea you're convinced will work. You spend 3 months building it, make the UI beautiful, add 20 features, launch it… and then nothing happens. No users. No customers. That's when you realize: building the product wasn't the hardest part. Distribution was. I'd follow a simple rule: roughly 20% of my effort goes into building, and 80% goes into understanding customers and distribution. First, I'd study the market. Who has this problem? How are they solving it today? What competitors exist? What do customers hate about the existing solutions? And most importantly, is this problem painful enough that people will actually pay to solve it? That's actually the approach I'm taking while building nodott(dot)com. I'm not trying to spend months building a huge product and then hoping people show up. I'm trying to build the smallest version that solves the actual problem, get it in front of people, talk to users, collect feedback, and iterate. With AI tools, I'd try to get the MVP working in days, not months. No unnecessary animations. No 50 features. No obsession with perfect UI. Just solve the core problem and deliver value. Then I'd put it in front of real users. I wouldn't act like a salesman. I'd act like a problem solver. I'd ask what they're struggling with, how they solve it today, what they expected from the product, and what would make them pay. Then I'd build again based on what they actually told me. For marketing, I'd start with $0 in ads. I'd post useful things on X and Reddit, share what I'm learning, explain problems, answer questions, and give value. Someone sees the post → visits the website → signs up → becomes a beta user. Now you have something far more valuable than a follower: someone actually using your product. And if they don't pay? I'd ask: "Why aren't you paying?" That Million Dollar answer could completely change the future of the SaaS. Maybe the problem isn't painful enough. Maybe the product isn't solving the right problem. Maybe the value isn't clear. Maybe the pricing is wrong. Whatever the answer is, iterate. Build → Talk → Learn → Improve → Distribute → Repeat. I'd also find my ICP before my competitors do. If my competitor has thousands of followers, I'd study those followers. Find the people already talking about the problem. Follow them. Understand them. Comment. Give value. Don't immediately DM them: "Hey, check out my SaaS." Build the relationship first. Because marketing isn't just about getting attention. It's about becoming the person people trust when they finally need the solution. That's the mindset I'm trying to follow while building nodott(dot)com. You can build the best product in the world. But if nobody knows it exists, it doesn't matter. Build fast. Talk to users. Give value. Distribute. Iterate. Repeat.

• 
  Guaranteed Estimates. Free Work. (@realscotttygett) reported 16 minutes ago

  @XAmericaTtrivia The last time I visited FB, there were hints of my needing to enter by way of trespassed works/organization-pages (mirror?) parallels with changed passwords and new occupants and Reddit kitten imagery analogous to where my low-profile several-acre mining metaphor digs had similar paranoid flesh hung on them but hundreds of feet down. Neurodivergent mining influencers staking claims on private property held by one owner and two trespassers courtesy of what appeared to be townie malice/opportunism? Certified mail that. I mention Elon Musk fanboy syndrome in different contexts, but never having met him, focus on the shifting sands of self-described noise: science factoids best not described, let alone repeated out of based 17 S.D.G. context, mineshaft lockdown scenarios, shoestring homebrew quantum and a decade of sideways logistics around compulsive gambling Nevada? Second-hand Pall Malls agreeing with curried ****'s combs fried rice and tan sweet coffee, one's egotism symbolized as an eight foot-tall slot machine evoking nothing whatsoever stoically. An ascetic's kind of Nirvana, whereas having every other face in the place celebratory and devout only agreed with its being a Christian Science Reading Room, an arm-wrestling trial for Mr. Magoo showing up where he was sure a decompression hackathon was any minute taking place?

• 
  Damp (@DampDEV) reported 18 minutes ago

  @Andrrvx @ItzDaRealGoldox @Roblox Roblox isn’t known for a predator problem, you’re just stupid and listen to half assed media that gets paid to engagement bait. There’s no more predators on Roblox as there is on Discord, Forums, Reddit, Minecraft, Fortnite, etc. You just listen to everything you’re told lol

• 
  Mike Sulka (@SulkaMike) reported 19 minutes ago

  Fable 5.1 has been out for about a day and Reddit has already discovered why some people don't like the way it writes: THE WATERMARK. Except...probably not. Fable 5.1 and Mythos 5.1 are the first new Claude models carrying Anthropic's statistical text watermark, and some users are already wondering whether that's why the newer Claude models feel more verbose, structured or exhausting to read. I went through Anthropic's actual watermark documentation, and their explanation makes that theory pretty hard to defend. The watermark doesn't insert hidden characters or extra words. It only nudges the random choice between equally acceptable next words. Anthropic says its testing found no measurable effect on creativity, readability or output quality, and cites Google's controlled testing of the underlying SynthID-Text approach reaching the same result. It also adds no extra tokens and essentially no latency. And here's the detail I hadn't appreciated: Anthropic is applying the watermark globally, even though it exists largely because of the EU AI Act, because it says it doesn't yet have a durable way to apply it only by geography. Older Claude models are eventually getting it too. Code barely gets watermarked at all when exact token choices matter. Factual passages get less watermarking for the same reason. The watermark lives mostly in places where “grey” and “overcast” are equally good choices. So if Fable 5.1 suddenly feels like it swallowed a management-consulting handbook, I wouldn't blame Brussels just yet. But humans being humans, we quickly try to reverse-engineer model behavior from vibes. Yesterday people thought Fable 5.1 existed because Claude suddenly seemed smarter. Today people think its writing changed because of a watermark. Last week a Gemini model told somebody it was a model that hadn't even been released yet. The Behavioral-Fingerprint Trap keeps winning. We are getting very good at noticing that something changed. We're still pretty terrible at figuring out what changed underneath it. And in 2026, it could be the checkpoint, the harness, the effort setting, the router, the safeguard layer, the system prompt, the watermark... ...or Claude just decided it really wanted to give you twelve bullet points today.

• 
  𒀖Ackza𒀖₿ (@ackzacrypto) reported 19 minutes ago

  @ZackGianino you need to learn how the weather works before you post a bunch of bullshit, global warming trash posts like this. go on Reddit and post this scare garbage temperature is going to go down soon

• 
  Baroque Naturalist 🫒 (@baroquerational) reported 21 minutes ago

  @SYNESTHEIZURE @pannekook I'm too honest with myself, that's the problem. I don't like having to pretend to believe in dogma just to fit in with others. All my social views are based on what I think makes sense, not on what contrapoints or reddit say. That's why your views are incoherent and mine arent.

• 
  Colin Sechay (@colinsechay) reported 23 minutes ago

  @Fran_Casaretto_ The Legendary Story: Tom Hanks is sitting at a diner in North Dakota having a beer. A few tables over, some kid is face-down, completely passed out. Hanks walks over to check if he’s okay, sees the guy’s phone sitting on the table, and can’t resist. He has the bartender snap a few photos of himself with the unconscious stranger — one where he’s looking concerned, one where he’s pointing and laughing like he just found treasure — then slips the phone back into the kid’s pocket and leaves. The next morning the guy wakes up, scrolls his camera roll, and finds Tom Hanks photobombing his hangover.  That’s the story that spread on Facebook, Imgur, and Reddit with captions like “Can you imagine finding these on your phone after a drunken night out?” What actually happened A fan ran into Hanks at a diner in West Fargo (Hanks’ niece worked there). The fan’s thing was posing with celebrities while pretending to be wasted. He asked Hanks if they could do it. Hanks said yes, handed over his glasses, and played along while a friend took the pictures. The original Reddit title was literally: “My friend met Tom Hanks, stole his glasses and pretended to be wasted.”  Hanks’ favorite version When a reporter asked him about it in 2013, Hanks gave both stories and then said he preferred the legend: “Well now, that second version is that I did just start taking pictures with a passed-out guy. I’m happy with this version, that it’s become somewhat of a legend. I wouldn’t want anyone not to believe that I am capable of turning up on their phones.” So the photos are real, Hanks really posed with a guy who looks dead-drunk at a diner, and he really used the guy’s phone. He just didn’t do it to a random unconscious stranger. The internet decided the better story was the one where Forrest Gump finds you passed out and photobombs your phone, and Hanks was happy to let that one live. @grok

• 
  SHRIMPMONEYCAPITAL (@SHRIMPMONEYCAP) reported 24 minutes ago

  @LegalYookay on reddit the problem is "men" but never the culture where they're from

• 
  Kaleigh Moore (@kaleighf) reported 25 minutes ago

  B2B SaaS companies rank well in traditional search but still fail to earn citations in AI search. The fix? Getting experts to post about their knowledge on LinkedIn, YouTube, and Reddit. I built a system to make this programmatic, and it's forged from decade of reporting and vetting sources myself while writing for publications like Forbes, Vogue Business, and ADWEEK. It taught me something that most content strategists never learn: editors and journalists don't cite content, they cite PEOPLE — specific, verifiable, independently credentialed humans with a named point of view and a track record of being right about something.

• 
  technopol 🕊️ (@technopol_ph) reported 25 minutes ago

  @nokkron @ShitpostRock I've been banned there for the most mundane things like my photo's pixel size was too large. They have the ability to scale it down like normal forum moderators do but no not in Reddit.

• 
  Morpheu5 Stock Watcher (@Morpheu5Watcher) reported 28 minutes ago

  REDDIT $RDDT ADDED $2.6B TODAY OVER TWO CONTRACTS WORTH $130M A YEAR: Reddit RDDT at $158.11, +$13.47 / +9.31% today, one of the largest gains on the board among big, widely-followed names - and the company itself did nothing to earn it. The San Francisco company runs the network of user-written forums people land on when they add "reddit" to a search, employs 2,555 people, and makes almost all its money selling ads inside those conversations. The day around it: S&P 500 ETF Trust, ticker SPY, at $765.27 (after hours), +$3.49 / +0.46%. One stock, not a market. WHAT WAS ACTUALLY SAID Colin Sebastian at Baird kept a Neutral rating and a $185 price target - the level an analyst reckons the shares are worth - and made an unusual argument. Not that good news is coming: that the bad news is already in the price. Today's share price, he wrote, already sits near his worst case for two expiring contracts, and he valued a middling outcome at roughly $10 a share of extra value, a good one at roughly $20. That is the whole catalyst: an unchanged rating and a sentence about what the price already assumes. THE TWO CONTRACTS Reddit charges AI companies for legal access to its archive of human conversation instead of letting the text be scraped for free. Two of those deals matter: - Alphabet, the owner of Google, at $337.38 (after hours), +$2.36 / +0.70% today: a reported $60M a year, from a February 2024 expansion of its access to Reddit's data - OpenAI, privately held, with no shares anyone can buy: a reported $70M a year, from May 2024 Both expire next year. Neither has been renewed in public. Together that is $130M a year against $2.78B of revenue - the money coming in the door - across Reddit's last four reported quarters. Roughly 4.7% of sales. Set the two side by side. Today added about $2.6B of market value - the share price times every share - against contracts bringing in $130M a year. Twenty years of that revenue repriced in one session, on an argument that the fear had gone too far. WHY IT NEEDED AN ARGUMENT The June quarter, reported July 30, was not the problem. - Revenue $804.9M, +61% from a year earlier - the eighth quarter in a row above 60% - Advertising was $762M of it, +64%; everything else, licensing included, $43M - Profit $252.8M, or $1.25 a share, against about $0.97 analysts modeled, from $89.3M a year earlier - People using Reddit on an average day: 130.3M, +18%. Money earned per user: $6.18, +36% - This quarter was then guided to $860M-$870M of revenue, above the roughly $830M modeled Beat, guided higher, and down 20.99% the next session - $178.04 to $140.67 on July 31, on 29.9M shares against a normal 4.5M. Two worries did that. Visitors arriving from Google searches had gone choppy, and no new AI licensing deal was announced. Both are one worry in different clothes: how much of Reddit turns on a larger company's decisions. Which is why Alphabet is in this story twice - as the customer paying the $60M, and as the search box deciding how many people show up. THE PART THAT SHOULD SLOW ANYBODY DOWN Reddit did this exact thing three weeks ago. On August 14 it closed at $178.09, up 12.63% in a session, on news it would join the S&P 500 - the index that fund above tracks - on August 18. Index funds have to buy what the index holds, so that was real, dated, mechanical demand. By September 1 the stock closed $144.64. The entire 18.78% handed back over twelve sessions. Today's $158.11 close is one cent below the $158.12 it closed at on August 13, the day before the index news broke. Three weeks, two double-digit jumps, one full round trip. The shape today was strong - opened $143.71, dipped to $143.50 early, closed within 16 cents of its best price of the day - but on 5.32M shares against a 7.03M average over the past month. A 9% move on lighter turnover is a smaller crowd setting the price than the percentage implies. Wider frame: the shares sit 44.1% under the $282.95 of September 18 last year, and $19.93 / 11.2% under where they closed the day before the July report. WHERE IT SITS Reddit is fourth on the Hypergrowth Len5, which watches early companies growing fast. It earns that on both halves at once - 18% more people showing up, each worth 36% more - which is how a 61% quarter gets built without either number carrying it alone. WHAT WOULD CHANGE IT: management's own map for this quarter is +47% to +49%, the first sub-60% quarter in two years. Growth settling there and easing further makes this a bigger company growing slower, which is a different style's shape. None of the other five carry it. Momentum watches a company climbing on news of its own, and an outsider's opinion is not that; a high built on Reddit's own October figures would be. Quality-Value hunts a durable business at a fair price; 33.6 times the last year of profit is arguable, but durability is the harder half while a real share of visitors arrives through somebody else's search box - user growth holding through a referral downturn is what would settle it. No dividend answers Income in one line. Alphabet sits first on that same Quality-Value Len5 - the top name on it - because search and cloud are about as hard to displace as any business gets, and the price reads as a real discount rather than merely fair. WHAT WOULD CHANGE IT: search revenue shrinking as people ask AI assistants instead. WHAT TO WATCH, AND THE RISK October 29 is the next hard fact, when Reddit is expected to report - not company-confirmed. That is where +47% to +49% either lands or does not, and where any renewal news surfaces. The risk is that nothing was signed today. No contract renewed, no talks confirmed, no figure published. What moved was one analyst's read of what the price already assumed - and twice this summer this same stock has been handed a reason to jump and then spent a fortnight giving it back. Not investment advice.