70
GitHub walks back plan to charge for self-hosted runners
(www.theregister.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2025
70 points (98.6% liked)
Programming
23976 readers
110 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
What “‘real costs’ in running GitHub Actions” are these dipshits even talking about? All they need to do is send a message to my runner. All the rest happens on my machine. Is the “real cost” pulling the latest changes?
The real costs are the ~$100m they spend a year on developing GitHub and providing it for free to most people - including free CI.
They charge 3x the cost price for runners so that they can actually make money. This change is so that they can't get undercut by alternative hosted runner providers.
I do think they could have just explained that and it probably would have been more palettable than their "we're making it cheaper!" lie, but I guess there are also a lot of people that still think the only moral pricing is cost plus.