I'm both a Github user and a Fossil user. I use Fossil for all of my own projects, because the common operations have less friction and everything runs very fast locally. I'm including wiki, ticketing, etc. in the "common operations" even though I'm the only user of those things.

I would say if you do all of your development in a corporate or institutional setting where you are a contributor on a distributed team, Github is the best choice and the choice will often already have been made for you anyway. If on the other hand you do a lot of development on your own projects, it could be beneficial to spend a half-day and try out Fossil.

A corporate setting once required perforce so I did everything in a local fossil repo and begrudgingly created the changes in perforce to ship already completed things.

You'll discover the arguments why Fossil is better if you read the article

That question will make more sense when you see the article is from 2016.

Has either software changed since then?

lol, the article talks about how nice it is to have a self hosted GUI for your SCM. There are a lot of those for git too, but they ignore that fact.

It's a feature to have it right there, a 'fossil ui' away from launching in a browser instead of whatever extra installed stuff git offers. Also choosing the right one from many takes more patience than I have.

Notably 'fossil' is a single static binary that can be anywhere on the $PATH too.