RSrsyring·May 27, 2026
Apparently, you aren't alone. :)
https://github.com/DaMrNelson/github-historical-uptime/issue...
In Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API RequestsDaMrNelson
github-historical-uptime
TypeScript2026–2026
DaMrNelson / github-historical-uptime
github-historical-uptime
Plotting the historical uptime of GitHub
2Distinct people
2Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
85GitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
Plotting the historical uptime of GitHub
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use has been verified yet.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 1:49:46 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by day2 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2026-05-10 23:37:34 UTC to 2026-05-27 22:16:31 UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 10 | 2026-05-10 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| May 11 | 2026-05-11 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-12 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 12 | 2026-05-12 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-13 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 13 | 2026-05-13 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-14 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 14 | 2026-05-14 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-15 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 15 | 2026-05-15 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-16 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 16 | 2026-05-16 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-17 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 17 | 2026-05-17 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 18 | 2026-05-18 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-19 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 19 | 2026-05-19 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-20 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 20 | 2026-05-20 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-21 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 21 | 2026-05-21 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-22 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 22 | 2026-05-22 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-23 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 23 | 2026-05-23 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-24 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 24 | 2026-05-24 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 25 | 2026-05-25 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-26 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 26 | 2026-05-26 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-27 00:00:00 UTC | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| May 27 | 2026-05-27 00:00:00 UTC | 2026-05-28 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
What Hacker News says
2 sourcesThat graph has bugged me since it went viral. The methodology is horseshit: https://github.com/DaMrNelson/github-historical-uptime
Just dumping HARs from devtools from a status site that hallucinates 100% uptime when it has no data. For example, all GitHub services had 100% uptime in June 1996: https://www.githubstatus.com/uptime?page=200
The graph gives GitHub Actions 100% uptime before it launched to GA in November 2019. That factors into the average uptime for every month on the graph before that. It's fully horseshit.
In GitHub is sinking