Normally I defend GH in the comments of these incidents but it’s been an impressively bad month by their standards, even when you filter for critical components filter out sev-2’s and 3’s.

taintlord223 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

The UI of that page is so nice, should build a github competitor.

The user profile / contributions and PR UX is pretty much the entire "hub" product since git is a fully separate offline app.

▲

embedding-shape an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> The UI of that page is so nice

Is it? Seems a text description of "Make a website outlining 'How cooked GitHub' is with a modern style" to basically any LLM would produce exactly that UI and design, literally nothing of that design a human had any influence on, besides the ones selecting what training data the used LLMs was trained with.

I think most of us who've tried using LLMs for web-design can recognize that style and design at this point, regardless of model actually used.

▲

angrydev an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Compared to near unusable pages that large organizations produce, yes this page is highly effective at conveying information. Who cares how it was produced?

	▲	sunrunner 6 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> this page is highly effective at conveying information Is it though? If the page is near unreadable? * Almost pure-black background rendering every not-pure-white colour barely readable * Dark-grey and low saturation colours used almost everywhere, for both fonts and other coloured elements (the orange cells in the calendar are the most readable thing) * Thin fonts - coupled with the dark grey colours this just adds to the readability issues * Yet another incredibly long info-dump of a page And then as far as actual information: * Vanity metrics as the main information, that is a lot of things with no context or historical information * A lot of aggregates and rollups that aren't that useful No, I haven't tried Reader Mode. It's a good demo for UI state syncing though, I'll give it that.
	▲	embedding-shape an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> Who cares how it was produced? Well, we're at least two people who care, since we were conversing about how good/bad the webdesign is, then you jumped in here :) If you don't care, why bother to reply to people who seemingly do care? What kind of conversation are you expecting here, "Yeah, do tooo"? :\|

▲

Hamuko an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The Bootstrap of 2020s.

	▲	sunrunner 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		At least Boostrap pages were readable ;)

▲

olmo23 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

What really grinds my gears is how easy it is to get better designs out of LLMs. But if you don't ask, you get the default.

	▲	hansmayer 21 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Here is a provocative thought - maybe these are the so-called "better designs" from LLMs? It's not like writing English sentences is some huge secret you are sitting on that no one else knows.
	▲	agos 11 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		what would you ask to get a better design?
	▲	drdrey 21 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		as someone who doesn't know how to get better design out of LLMs, can you elaborate?

▲

voxic11 3 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The UI is in the default claude code style

▲

vinnymac 41 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I’m actively working on an alternative Frontend for Forgejo at the moment, completely self hostable, free, and open source.

Moving everything from GitHub to Forgejo and Tangled for now. These outages haven’t effected me for the past month because of this.

▲

FpUser an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>"The UI of that page is so nice"

Most part screen is taken by picture. Contrast ratio is really low. Hard to read Should they remove that useless banner, current status which is the most interesting part coud've been made visible right away.

I would call this whole thing highly un-ergonomic

▲

DetroitThrow an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Lol it's pretty bad UI

▲

btown 17 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Is the “streak” days of continuous uptime, or of days with at least one downtime incident? I think it’s the latter :]

	▲	joshuaissac 12 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It looks like it is the number of consecutive days with no incident. If you look at 31 Dec 2025, that corresponds to an 8-day period with no incidents.

▲

EduardoBautista 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

May has been filled with critical issues. It seems it's getting worse over time.

▲

pluc 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Name one thing Microsoft didn't run into the ground post-acquisition

▲

robotmaxtron an hour ago | parent | next [-]

hey now, LinkedIn was terrible before Microsoft.

▲

SteveNuts an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Java or Bedrock edition, and have you tried logging into your EntraID Microsoft Teams for Xbox account lately? Make sure to check the box to keep you logged in!

	▲	cedws 14 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Last I heard UK Minecraft players aren't even allowed to talk anymore without ID verification.

▲

storus an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not as bad as it is now. All I see are suggested posts from people I never connected with and those are full of instagramesque self-promoting banal vibes.

▲

Mindwipe 13 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

TBH, even LinkedIn seemed to provide me with posts advertising events that happened two weeks ago a bit less pre-acquisition.

▲

darkamaul an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think Minecraft is still in good shape

▲

embedding-shape an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I wouldn't know, somehow this game I bought maybe 15 years ago is no longer playable for me, my account was supposed to be migrated from Mojang to Microsoft or similar, but then that never happened or something, and trying to login now asks me to contact Microsoft support, which I've tried 3-4 times, never had anyone respond to me so who knows how the game is today? I stopped trying at this point...

Personally, once a game I own is janked from my hands because of organizational decisions, that's the time I'll stop consider the game "in good shape", but I'm sure the people who had to buy the same game a second time still enjoy it.

	▲	beart an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, the account migration was a mess. Support response times were at least 30 days, if you ever actually received a response at all (I never did). I did buy the game a second time in order to play with my kids.

▲

bspammer an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They deleted my account from 2010 because I didn't convert it to a Microsoft one. They baked an incredibly aggressive chat filter into multiplayer, even if you're not playing on official servers. They've added microtransactions for things that we previously free (skins, resource packs). They force you into their shitty, bloated, user-hostile launcher with adverts.

▲

somewhatgoated 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲

elzbardico 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

GH was acquired by microsoft some eight years ago. It has been working quite well until recently.

People may have had complaints about functionality, features, commercial issues, but the thing used to at least have a decent uptime until recently.

▲

chris_money202 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Has nothing to do with Microsoft acquisition... AI usage has increased demand and load. More PRs, more Action runners, more of everything firing. GitHub just wasn't ready for the scale and are now having issues catching up with it as it continues to increase exponentially.

	▲	lqstuart 13 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		MSFT is also forcing its subsidiaries to “lean into AI” so that they can fire people to cover for Satya’s bad investments
	▲	voncheese 29 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Yeah, that and Microsoft has been slow to move the infrastructure to something that scales better to handle that load. The more surpassing part is that Microsoft hasn't figured out a way to manage/contain the AI-sourced traffic better so it doesn't create all this noisy neighbor problems for non-AI usage/users.

▲

05hundred an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It has been working quite well until recently.

I'm not sure how reliable the data is, but average uptime seems to have dipped measurably starting within a year of the aquisition, according to https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/

▲

bsimpson 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It also used to be run as an independent company with access to MS's resources.

Now it's a unit in their AI hype machine.

▲

modriano an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

MSFT was pretty arms length for the first 5-6 years. I was honestly kind of impressed and it made my opinion of MSFT better. But then AI made it too attractive of a target and MSFT couldn't help but make it a place the former CEO wanted to leave (and it has been running headless for about a year now).

It's quite disappointing objectively, but I expected worse from MSFT.

▲

rvz an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

They are already cooked as this has been happening ever since the Microsoft acquisition and it was run to the ground before 2023.

At this point you would get better uptime by just self-hosting your own GitLab, Forgejo or Codeberg instance instead of dealing with Github's unreliablity.

There is no defending them with their clear neglet and carelessness of the platform.