Obv a gross looking chart, but I am bothered that the left hand scale is trimmed off. I expect those are 10% increments, but wouldn’t be shocked if Original was like 99.0, 98.0, 97.0, etc.
You’d be surprised: https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/
But weirdly enough it feels much worse using gh professionally than the scale makes it seem.
Move slow and break shit
It’s the best of both worsts.

I’m stupid what does zero nines uptime mean?
When contracting a service, usually there are clauses that specify that it needs to be fully working and available x% of time, and compensation may be due in case this goal isn’t met.
Let’s say GitHub was down for 1 full day in the last year, that’s 99.7% availability. That’s “2 nines”, but sometimes people might say “2 nines five”, meaning “better than 99.5% uptime”.
I’d say that the expectation for a high availability service nowadays is “5 nines”: 99.999% uptime. That’s around 5 minutes of downtime in a full year. This kind of performance from a site like GitHub is just unacceptable…
These services measure their uptimes in number of nines, the more the better.
Sometimes the humorous term “nine fives” (55.5555555%) is used to contrast with “five nines” (99.999%),[18][19][20] though this is not an actual goal….
Maybe Microsoft misunderstood the assignment, and thought this was a goal. At their current rate, it’s certainly more achievable than the more traditional “five nines”.
As an aside, I love how the following is preferences as “casual”, and then the author starts arguing semantics:
Similarly, percentages ending in a 5 have conventional names, traditionally the number of nines, then “five”, so 99.95% is “three nines five”, abbreviated 3N5.[13][14] This is casually referred to as “three and a half nines”,[15] but this is incorrect….
Lies! 89.98% has two nines in it!
I see two nines
Microsoft never promised where the nines would be






