Should I use Git locally instead of a hosted service?

It is worth learning the Git command line even if you prefer a graphical client. A GUI can make common tasks more comfortable, but the command line helps you understand what the client is doing and is widely used in professional environments. A practical setup would be local Git repositories, regular pushes to a remote host for backup, and a GUI when it makes browsing history or handling merges easier.

A desktop Git client and a hosting service solve different problems. Git itself handles local version history, branches, commits, and merges. A service such as GitHub, GitLab, or another host stores a remote copy that can act as a backup, let you work from multiple computers, and make it easier to share or collaborate. You can use any client you like locally while pushing to whichever host you prefer. I would not keep important projects only on one hard drive, since hardware failure could erase everything.

You don't have to switch away from GitHub based only on things you've heard. It is generally reliable for ordinary repositories, and many reported problems concern optional services such as automated build and deployment pipelines. If you dislike its policies or features, alternatives include GitLab, Codeberg, Bitbucket, or a self-hosted service such as Gitea or Forgejo. The important part is maintaining an off-computer copy, not which interface you use.