I think it's interesting to note how people have gone to expecting 5-digit reliability out of an internet service. Not only is GitHub under fire, but the whole

I think it's interesting to note how people have gone to expecting 5-digit reliability out of an internet service. Not only is GitHub under fire, but the whole IPSec industry gets blamed. Back when my dad installed physical PBXes, the big ones that could be the size of a mainframe, uptime the biggest argument: they had to have reliability to five nines (99.99999%, if you don't get it). Then when cellphones first came out, everyone got lackadaisical about dropped calls. And overnight an entire industry worried about reliability "to five nines" changed, and "whatever, it's a new service, you've got to expect some difficulties." The internet started with relatively low reliability. No web host I've ever seen has truly been able to achieve 99.999% uptime. And yet, when GitHub goes down under a "large DDOS attack" but still manages to maintain 99.85% uptime over the last month (with several DDOS-caused outages) everyone comes out of the woodwork to complain. After all, it isn't as-if hosting a massive service while keeping everything secure and running happily is an easy thing. If you're tired of GitHub outages, then get a Bitbucket account, or host your own Git repository for backup. What serious developer, or service, would keep all their eggs in one basket if they really depended on the uptime of just one centralized service?