World's Largest Software Development Platform...GitHub Is Down!

Update: After 23 minutes of outage, GitHub is back up...

*  *  *

Less than 24 hours after CES was plunged into darkness by a power outage, GitHub - arguably the world's largest software development platform - is down, sparking turmoil among developers worldwide.

As one knowledgable tech expert warned "ever wonder what the end of the world looks like? It's this..."

Why is it such a big deal? Simple...

Every major website and software project in the world relies on the availability of the repositories of code stored and git hub.

As part of continuous integration and continuous development workflows those repositories are queried for their contents every time a new build or release of a website or project is made.

If they are unavailable those builds will fail. Good developers plan for that contingency but error handling is difficult and error-prone.

And GitHub should be in GitHub.

An outage like this basically means that any sites that need to update as a result of some weird bug they found or any software that needs to be patched can't happen.

Open source software is built on a web of interconnected and distributed components. When it works it's tremendously efficient but if it fails things go south quickly.




HillaryOdor ConnectingTheDots Jan 11, 2018 11:09 AM Permalink

Yeah.  That's why Linux is dominating Windows and MacOS in the desktop market, right?

Oh wait it has a miniscule marketshare and it isn't really growing.  Get rid of the GPL if you want more innovation in FOSS.

But unfortunately people just use whatever software they're used to.  They will never ever change.  Hell half of bittorrent people still use uTorrent despite the fact that they have a well-documented history of hiding malware in their software.  So what do people do?  Most of them just grab an older version of the same software and keep using it.  People are helpless. They will never change.

Anyway github is a cesspool of SJW communist filth.  Use BitBucket.

In reply to by ConnectingTheDots

Gap Admirer SoDamnMad Jan 11, 2018 11:31 AM Permalink

Oh, crap...  Much of the freely available crypto "coin" code is on GitHub.  How will all of the new "coins" be created without people being able to copy the code? This means that a kid in her mom's basement can't come out with a new coin until GitHub is back up. We need many new cryptos daily to roll through our speculation vehicles.

In reply to by SoDamnMad

Gap Admirer lenz3099 Jan 11, 2018 12:40 PM Permalink

LOL!!!  So cute, sweetie!

So you, as one of my "betters," are claiming that there is no crypto source code freely available on GitHub where one can create their own coin in mere minutes.  Or, you are confident that the new "coins" will be back in production as GitHub will be up and running shortly.  Possibly both.  No worries either way.  New, valuable, coins will be ramping up again soon.

In reply to by lenz3099

HillaryOdor DontGive Jan 11, 2018 11:31 AM Permalink

No but you are.  That's all you have?  Seriously?  3 words and a hyperlink? 

If you actually read that article instead of just having such a feminine emotional reaction to the title you would see the following:

Unix and Unix-like operating systems power about 67 percent of all web servers.

Notice it does not say Linux.  There is a good reason for that, because Linux has a restrictive license that pushes business innovation away.   The Linux cult likes to pretend every Unix ever is the same as Linux and therefore Linux is everywhere.  How many of those servers are actually running Linux?

Furthermore a server is not a desktop, so my point still stands.  What a bunch of computer nerds use is irrelevant to the broader market.  Linux will never be the dominant desktop OS, not ever.  Linus shot his OS in the foot adopting this idiotic communist GPL.

As soon as the FreeBSD group gets their drivers up to date and offer a functional laptop OS I am personally abandoning Linux and I will never look back.  Fuck Linux.

In reply to by DontGive

DontGive HillaryOdor Jan 11, 2018 11:45 AM Permalink

You are correct. Desktop-wise it lacks market share. But keep in mind, many of us lump *nix in the same group. If you are talking about sub-markets though, you might as well break it out by Windows version while you are at it.

If we are splitting hairs though, Git isn't all about a specific OS. It's not even GPL specific.

Hell, even market share is fluid. Just like Mores Law.

In reply to by HillaryOdor

HillaryOdor DontGive Jan 11, 2018 11:52 AM Permalink

I bet you Windows XP still dominates the sum total of all *nix desktop OS use.

And if you're going to separate out windows version then you have to separate all the different *nix distributions also.  It's not even close.  People got used to windows.  That's what they know.  That's what they will use, forever, until another COMPANY comes along and offers a better software ecosystem, which I guarantee you will not be based on Linux, but some other Unix-like OS, probably BSD, like MacOS.  

I'm even contemplating going mac my next computer, because although I hate apple, it is at least Unix-like and everything will just work, unlike Linux.  Also Apple will continue to innovate.  Where is the Linux innovation?  What, systemd?  Seriously?  Where is wayland even?  How long has it been in development?  It's still garbage!  Well what do you expect?  There is no organized company directing its development.  Everyone just wants it for free.  Programmers need to eat too.

Free software is great.  I love a lot of FOSS, but I hate IP in general, and copyleft just as bad as copyright, if not worse.

In reply to by DontGive

DontGive HillaryOdor Jan 11, 2018 12:17 PM Permalink

Again, you are right (except maybe going the Apple route).

If we are getting more granular though, would you consider that Desktop's are getting phased out? Windows XP wont have LTS forever.

On a grand scale, aren't more hardware manufacturer's considering these things? Even software guys are going cross-platform these days.

Programmers are eating just fine, despite OS or licensing architecture.

My final point is, your gripe appears to be with licensing (GPL). This article is about GitHub. The flaw in nature in this case has to do with centralization. Not OS specific, or license specific.

People are helpless. They will never change.

Change is happening all the time. How many kids these days even know what drivers are from a OS standpoint?

In reply to by HillaryOdor

HillaryOdor DontGive Jan 11, 2018 12:24 PM Permalink

I don't like GPL.  I don't like GItHub.  My original comment was in response to a post that FOSS is going to dramatically change the world.  Give me a break.  FOSS cannot compete with professional teams of engineers with professional management, and that means paid software.  Look I love GIMP (despite the license), but it's not going to replace photoshop.  Photoshop is what the pros use, and so that's what everyone else wants to use also.  I bet more people pirate PS than use GIMP.  I'm just being realistic.  Yes Microsoft sucks.  Apple sucks.  It's not because it costs money or because they are companies.  I'm getting sick of this anti-business Marxist attitude I see everywhere.  And RMS and Linus, Linux and GNU definitely subscribe to this attitude, and even redefine "freedom" in the process.  The reason those giant corporations suck is because of the law, i.e. the state.  They have patent arsenals that stifle all kinds of innovation everywhere and lead to all kinds of lawsuits and legal fees running small companies out of business.  If you want to blame anybody blame the founding fathers for putting that stuff in the constitution.  

In reply to by DontGive

bluskyes HillaryOdor Jan 11, 2018 11:41 AM Permalink

Hey gramps. nobody uses a desktop anymore. It's going the way of the rotary phone.
The whole mobile landscape is linux - except for crApple.
Even Microsoft is including a linux abstraction layer to their new OS's

Microsoft is a parasite,  charging licensing fees for every device that speaks to it's server. That means an MS DHCP server must be licensed for every IP obtained. At a cost of around $100/device.


In reply to by HillaryOdor

HillaryOdor bluskyes Jan 11, 2018 11:46 AM Permalink

The whole mobile landscape, meaning Android.  Android is not Linux.  Android operates on a virtual Java machine that runs on a special fork of an old version of the Linux kernel.  They managed to gather their legal resources and form a wall around the kernel's restrictive license to operate a commercial software ecosystem.  No company that isn't a giant megacorporation is going to be able to afford teams of lawyers to navigate the legal issues in doing this maneuver.  So now we are all stuck with android forever.  Great.  Android sucks anyway.   And I would add they released their results not under the GPL but under a far more permissive license because they wanted actual companies to use android on their phones.  Why do you think they started with Linux and then released under a different license?  I assure you it was an intentional decision, although I have no idea why they didn't just use BSD instead.

And the Linux compatibility layer in Windows sucks.  First of all you have to choose between ubuntu (eck!) or fedora (meh!) in the Windows Store (I feel dirty just typing that).  Then it barely works.  I edited my /etc/hosts file to more easily ssh into a local server.  It isn't even persistent.  you close the terminal and open it back up and it reset the file.  So now I have to manually type the IP address every time.  I might as well just use cygwin if I'm going to force myself to use Windows, which I basically have to if I want to play any games, not that there's many good ones anymore anyway.

In reply to by bluskyes

HillaryOdor Dilluminati Jan 11, 2018 12:13 PM Permalink

The world runs on Ubuntu.  Sure, whatever you say.  Ubuntu is absolute garbage, even by Linux standards.  Just look at Unity.  All those resources dumped into it, and now they're going back to regular old gnome.  I wonder how dumb the people who have been donating money to canonical feel.  Maybe it was just a tax write-off anyway.  Can they even survive without donations?

In reply to by Dilluminati

HillaryOdor techpriest Jan 11, 2018 1:56 PM Permalink

Nobody is going to change to an OS that doesn't work out of the box.  Forget the lack of their favorite software.  That's a whole different issue.

I guided my wife through installing Antergos on her laptop and the default DM (lightdm) didn't render for some reason.  For most people that's a moment where they just give up and say "Ok, back to Windows I guess."  To make sure everything works on the variety of hardware out there requires far more resources than the Linux community possesses or will ever possess. 

Say what you want about Windows, and everyone who knows me knows I do as I despise Windows, but it typically just works (in its own shitty way).  It does what you expect it to do.  Linux is often a hassle to do simple things.  People don't have the patience for that, and I don't blame them.

In reply to by techpriest

Scipio Africanuz HillaryOdor Jan 11, 2018 1:50 PM Permalink

So someone decides to contribute his knowledge and work for free, without coercion or blackmail, and he/she automatically identifies as as a sjw communist filth? Wow! Thanks for the eye opener. Nikolai Tesla, Albert Einstein, Linus Torvalds, Tyler Durden! I'm on to you guys! You're sjw communist filth for providing us stuff for free, that's not right, and it's certainly criminal!

In reply to by HillaryOdor

Tarkus Scipio Africanuz Jan 11, 2018 3:33 PM Permalink

From a logical standpoint, your comments are all over the place...

Fine, no arguments. What did their products, services, or knowledge cost you personally?

At no point was it about the cost. It's about rewarding the creator, all of them had profited from their work in one way or another. But the toxic side of open-source feels entitled to free software (including updates and fixes, and when those stop someone should make a free alternative).

I'm a conservative, I don't live or work in silicon valley, I love to reverse engineer, and write code amongst many other proclivities and let me tell you, I'm a SJW who believes in the social justice of LIBERTY. Am I communist filth too?

The 'communists' in his context are the toxic members of the open-source community that prefer to virtue-signal rather than write good code or that get extremely defensive with their work (and who can blame them, it's their work and they did it for free) and go on power-trips when others want to contribute to their 'baby' or those that don't properly maintain their code but prohibit others from picking up from their work and commercialize it (ultimate hypocrisy on display: "it's my code and I'm letting you use it but don't you dare modify and monetize it; if i had to make the mistake of working for free because i couldn't figure out how to make money, you should too!") or those that attempt to build slightly different versions of existing tools instead of contributing to the already established and mature tools (because, fuck it, i want the glory of being on the moral high-ground!) and on and on...

Don't get me wrong, I understand your angst with GPL. You're right that it could be less restrictive, and more flexible, I understand that it also slows down innovation in some aspect but then again, the thing with a free market, is that you can try and do things differently if you believe the market will reward you.

The participants to the free market that pay programmers to write code prefer to keep that code closed-source / proprietary. A lot of people that code for FOSS don't want others to profit from their work but expect others to contribute for free and demand to get credit for working for free (regardless of the quality of their output, including code quality, consistency, performance, general professionalism etc.). Some of these people can't even write legible English and their code is atrocious but others are expected to not only not point that out but even show respect because they're 'innovating'.


For the open-source community you're evil if you think a dev should be payed for his work and you're a saint if you do it for free. And exactly like SJW's there's no room in the middle. It's the same polarization as in politics, and that's the damn problem!

Here's a question, would you rather have your heart-monitor software written by a person that is payed for the work or by someone that does it in his spare time. Compare the environments they work in.

One goes to a job and sits at a desk, knowing that he can concentrate on hist task, somebody else shares his responsibility (e.g. devs and testers) or manages the deadlines and expectations, or supervises the whole thing to make sure everyone is pulling in the same direction, or handles the financial responsibility, or handles the client's tantrums, or handles the infrastructure, or handles the documentation, or handles the strategic vision and architecture etc.

One sits late at night after a day at work, where he most likely has done the same thing (and it's draining, no matter how good you are), and has a lot of distractions around him (pets, significant-other etc.) and a far more relaxed environment where one's allowed to not concentrate on his work (cause the internet is full of distractions) and has to handle every aspect of his coding cause very few people actually code-review his work (that's before he reviews other people's work if he feels like letting others contribute) let alone test it and obviously, who has the time to set up code-quality tools (not just automated tests that don't even go through 33% of the code let alone 50%+).

FOSS is not a panacea, that's what the toxic community does not understand.

FOSS should not disappear but the community should improve. A bit more maturity would go a long way.

In reply to by Scipio Africanuz

mcspud Tarkus Jan 11, 2018 4:26 PM Permalink

This is the most rambling, garbage comment I've ever read, full of weasel-words and half truths.


To wit:

Here's a question, would you rather have your heart-monitor software written by a person that is payed for the work or by someone that does it in his spare time. Compare the environments they work in.

Thats not how open-source works - the code would be public, and people take other peoples lives very seriously; the net effect being you would have (tens-of)thousands of programmers looking that code, understanding exactly how it works, down to the level of optimising compilers to make sure that the person with the pacemaker wont die.

And again

and improving their skills or those that don't properly maintain their code but prohibit others from picking up from their work and commercialize it (ultimate hypocrisy on display: "it's my code and I'm letting you use it but don't you dare modify and monetize it; if i had to make the mistake of working for free because i couldn't figure out how to make money, you should too!") 

Hypocrisy does not mean what you think it does.

In reply to by Tarkus

Tarkus mcspud Jan 11, 2018 5:02 PM Permalink

Heartbleed was caught and fixed by the community in a timely manner was it not? 2 years for how many allegedly thousands of people looking at it?

The fact that there is this belief that a million competent pairs of eyes is somehow looking at this code and contributing to it doesn't explain the fact that most paid software is miles better than free alternatives. Doesn't it show that money is a better incentive than simply 'the goodness of their hearts'? Doesn't it show that there is room for improvement?

And perhaps hypocrisy was not the right word there, although I've met a lot of contributors that regretted going in or not monetizing their work (which to me seems weird, seeing that they were in it for the 'greater good').

In reply to by mcspud