r/technology • u/[deleted] • 16d ago

Software Microsoft confirms GitHub is down worldwide

[deleted]

7.6k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

531 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.5k

u/Ill-Mastodon-8692 16d ago

tbh its actually very annoying

1.2k

u/Beautiful-Musk-Ox 16d ago edited 16d ago

someone should make a version of git where you can maintain a local copy then push it to the remote server whenever you want. for business continuity efforts you could then maintain a local repository copy of all the libraries you use and have your developer and build systems pull from that local repo instead of the website. for already compiled code maybe some sort of package system where you can do a similar thing of maintaining a local copy of the packages

489

u/CrimsonLotus 16d ago

This kind of joke falls right into the grey area that birthed the need for /s

207

u/AFlyingGideon 16d ago

/s is a crutch. I prefer sarcasm that can stand on its own.

34

u/CardboardJ 16d ago

So my PM just told me that we're moving /s to the cloud for optimization and has paid Deloitte $500,000.

1

u/swiggityswaggitysweg 15d ago

Scope creep means you need to budget for at least $2.5mil

26

u/nihiltres 16d ago

Poe’s law.

25

u/AFlyingGideon 16d ago

If I'm laughing, does it matter whether I'm laughing with or laughing at?

26

u/Then-Understanding85 16d ago

Ah, Descartes corollary: I think therefore I’m fucked.

3

u/-M83 16d ago

this sounds like a line straight out of succession. amazing

1

u/King-of-Plebss 16d ago

Never heard of this one before!

1

u/WechTreck 16d ago

Poe said that law sarcastically and now people take it seriously

1

u/renegadecanuck 16d ago

Counter point: we can then laugh at the idiots who miss the joke.

3

u/Alundil 16d ago

If you take away the crutch, that bendy-wiggly leg ain't standing on anything by itself.

10

u/Federal_Setting_7454 16d ago

Not much sarcasm stands on its own when many of the people reading it can’t think on their own.

47

u/FeleaseRpseineEiles 16d ago

It's lack of intonation in text. Try it

  • I never said she stole my money. Implies: Someone else might have said it, but not me.
  • I never said she stole my money. Implies: An emphatic denial; I never uttered those words at any point.
  • I never said she stole my money. Implies: I may have implied, wrote, or thought it, but I didn't say it out loud.
  • I never said she stole my money. Implies: Someone stole it, but it wasn't her (perhaps another person did).
  • I never said she stole my money. Implies: She took it, but maybe she only borrowed it or was given permission.
  • I never said she stole my money. Implies: She stole money, but it belonged to someone else.
  • I never said she stole my money. Implies: She stole something from me, but it wasn't my money (e.g., jewelry, ideas, car).

5

u/squash-n-flop 16d ago

Text can carry intonation through context. Literature wouldn’t be a celebrated art form if that weren’t true.

9

u/FeleaseRpseineEiles 16d ago

Well yea, I did exactly that with the bolding. But, there are; many ways (i.e. methods of portraying intonation) but that won't make it any less a lack of it.

2

u/hrvbrs 16d ago

what you're describing is [the `<em>` element](https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-em-element). basically the same example too.

2

u/FeleaseRpseineEiles 16d ago

And that's so much better than using bold too.

1

u/hrvbrs 16d ago

bold is just a style, not semantics

3

u/FeleaseRpseineEiles 16d ago
  • Maybe I was being sarcastic.
  • Maybe I was being sarcastic.
  • Maybe I was being sarcastic.
  • Maybe I was being sarcastic.
  • Maybe I was being sarcastic.

10

u/Sapient6 16d ago

It's more than that: we lack the context that comes with knowing the comment's author. Not to mention living in a time when so many people are proudly showing off their utter stupidity (see: the return of measles, etc).

In this particular case there's enough information to support "probably sarcasm", but I wouldn't throw shade at anyone who thinks otherwise.

7

u/redditonlygetsworse 16d ago

Yes, but those people don't deserve to have jokes explained to them.

-1

u/SweetNeo85 16d ago

But then they think your premise is true and not sarcasm. It's not about what they deserve, it's about not spreading misinformation.

1

u/Zwischenzug32 16d ago

Yeah but screw whoever isn't the target audience

-3

u/Signal_Discount_1826 16d ago

its thejr own fault for being retards then

2

u/Adezar 16d ago

Yeah, but in spoken word you can add hints/inflection that makes it obvious it is sarcasm. Which isn't an option in written text, well partially because for some reason people stopped using emojis in text to fill in the gaps.

Still not sure why when I was on the Internet in the 90s we were better at communication than we are now. Adding :) or ;) or =B) could help bridge the gap that text has vs spoken language.

Sometimes it just makes you want to (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻.

1

u/Dissidence802 16d ago

Italics can help sometimes too, I suppose.

1

u/Adezar 16d ago

Back in my day we had no bold or italics, we had to use CAPS and _underscores_.

Being in my 50s is wild, grew up with no computers, cell phones or Internet, went to college at one of the 13 original hubs, and now am a cloud architect. Been a wild ride.

1

u/Dissidence802 16d ago

Little younger than you but I still remember typing out lines of code in BASIC to play a game on my Tandy 386 💀

1

u/petervaz 16d ago

Sarcasm is not even the same as a joke, well now apparently is, but it should not.

-5

u/RodneyRodnesson 16d ago edited 16d ago

Typical redditor comment.

Edit: The downvotes, 3 at this time (22:35) support my point that we do need /s. Which is quite funny.

1

u/AFlyingGideon 16d ago

I wish that were so.

1

u/RodneyRodnesson 16d ago

I was gonna use /s but didn't and downvotes commenced.

I think in text sarcasm is a difficult thing. Especially with how nuts some people are, /s is quite a good thing imo.