Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- I remember someone in that place telling me "i cant mention AI in my plans because they will laugh at me".
That was about 2 years ago. Im not kidding.
I dont know what the moral of the story is, but I found it weird at the time ( for added context - i was using AI back then about 10 hours a day, BUT I think sentiment on HN was "still" around the vibe of "you use AI to code without checking every line? I doubt your projects work" - but I had nothing better to do then wrestle with it and was surprised how I hadnt checked my code in weeks but stuff "worked". Its much better now and agents are accepted ofcourse but it sort of "snuck up" on people even in the tech community as recently as that.
I guess what Im saying is time is going quickly.
by ionwake - So you're spamming github with slop and actual good code can't be merged? Got it.by Crusoe123
- Would be funny / interesting / scary if it was another AI related incident like happened with hugging face.
A whole lot of AI agents are presumably using Github as part of a workflow.
Would be story worthy if one of them mis interpreted their instructions and is causing havoc.
Like "Really make sure changes are saved to git" -> agent "I have to hack into github backend to really make sure the changes are saved to disk"
by pianopatrick - So you're asking github employees to violate their NDA?by zeafoamrun
- People share bits of their company internals all the time, and often in such a way they that is so vague and general that they don't really violate any NDAs. Your NDA likely isn't that strict anyway.
See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49353915
Disclaimer: not a lawyer
by fg137 - Not necessarily. It's quite common for friends of friends to spread half-truth rumors.by xpct
- Frankly yes. Do it in a way that doesn’t violate outright or cover your tracks. Customers deserve to know the truth of the type of company they are dealing with.by sharts
- 14x commit growth in one year is brutal for any infrastructure. Scaling isn't just adding hardware.by Tbarlow
- GitHub is unstable since around 2020by dgellow
- I think it's two things:
- GitHub attempting (and seemingly failing) to move to Azure infrastucture for its website backend
- AI generated code wrecking the site due to the volume of activities.
- Lovable only uses GitHub for storing projects. And requires people to provide their own GitHub account. Lots of vibe coders with no technical background are now having lovable push commits to GitHubby alightsoul
- Many microsoft services are down/failing today, including sites hosted on Azure. I'm guessing it's a larger MS outage.by solfox
- So perhaps we should be asking Azure engineers, not Guthub engineers?by joshdavham
- GitHub Will Prioritize Migrating to Azure Over Feature Development - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45517173 - October 2025 (63 comments)
HN Search: azure capacity - https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
Azure Capacity Crunch Extends into 2026 Amid Data Center Constraints - https://windowsforum.com/threads/azure-capacity-crunch-exten... - October 9th, 2025
by toomuchtodo - I got an "it is unacceptable" from their CPO on 8/7, and that they are "working around the clock on it".
https://x.com/mariorod1/status/2085800861469495465
I really think something deeper is going wrong there, and they're not being honest with their paying customers (and enterprises) about it.
by qrush - I wouldn’t be surprised if that tweet response you got was written by an LLMby dgellow
- I mean they may be working around the clock, but after 5 or 6 layoffs in 3 years… half their engineers are probably still learning the code base.by Pseudocrat
- The reality is that it's probably a skill issue. Scaling a mature platform 10x can be a really, really hard problem, they obviously don't have their arms around a solution, and are probably spending a majority of their time on ops to keep the bleeding down. In the old days you would have Jeff Dean come down from heaven and invent a new database for you or something like that. It doesn't really seem like Github has that kind of technical ability, so they're probably trying to cobble together Azure ops with internal bandaids while everyone internally is cranking out AI code and it's just not going to be enough.by tibbar
- non-helpful answer: the "Microsoft Acquires GitHub" line in this graph answers all questions https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/by herpdyderp
- Microsoft acquires GitHub and subsequently moves all infrastructure to Azureby traviswingo
- Seems to be a pattern that infra teams in and around Azure don't know how to deal with age-of-AI levels of demand and struggle when internal politics + technical hubris get in the way: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242by chem83
- On the other hand I think usage increased and GitHub operates now at a different scale.by ciupicri
- I’ve noticed the same thing with computers, whenever I install MS windows on them uptime tanks ;)by ornornor
- Microsoft acquiring GitHub is not a valid root cause analysis explaining Github’s degraded SLA.by joshdavham
- In all fairness, the features expanded substantially after the acquisition so there's are a lot more components that can experience downtime. Pre-acquisition, github was a fairly simple code repository with issues bolted on. Actions, Dependabot, Codespaces, Advanced Security, Package Registry, Copilot, etc. all came after the acquisition and probably involve much more overhead than what github was prior to the acquisition. It basically went from code hosting platform where machines are sitting idle when pushes and pulls aren't happening to a fully integrated developer ecosystem. Any one of those things experiencing degraded performance is going to show up on an uptime chart.by jm4
- To be fair, before the aquisition, GitHub was super stable, but also it felt like they rarely changed or added anything.
After Microsoft acquired them, they started rolling out new features at an incredible pace. And if you look at the breakdown of the downtime, most of the downtime is in features that didn't exist before the acquisition.
Though not all of the downtime is in new features. The core is also less stable than ever.
- Note that most of the downtime in that graph comes from Github Actions, which simply didn't exist before the Microsoft acquisition.
The downtime also starts happening in 2020, which is a while after the acquisition. 2020 was the year many people started learning to code while being stuck at home.
by flexagoon - Github used to be built on mysql / redis / ruby on rails / C / shell, running on dedicated hardware. Microsoft left it like that after they acquired the company.
Eventually, though, they decided to migrate the whole thing to Azure. And they were far enough through that to be basically committed... when AI coding started hitting them with much higher workloads.
I personally think the reliability problems are more to do with the reliability of the Azure migration. But both factors are likely relevant.
by andyjohnson0 - After their infamous "Fail Whale" outages, Twitter replaced its Ruby on Rails / MySQL stack with modern (at the time) technologies: Scala (functional language running on the JVM) / Finagle (RPC) / Thrift (framework) / Kafka (message queues) and this made Twitter stable under the load of several hundred million users.
Ruby is single-threaded, slow with poor GC and memory leaks. As Twitter's Alex Payne said publicly in 2008: "there shouldn't be doubt in anybody's mind that Ruby itself is slow" and that scaling Rails meant "just throw more instances at it"
by cbeach - This is the reason, at least what I know from people who worked there, the azure migration has been very painful as far as I’m awareby dgellow