AOL outages and service status in Cardiff, Wales

Problems in the last 24 hours in Cardiff, Wales

The chart below shows the number of AOL reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Cardiff, Wales and surrounding areas. An outage is declared when the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line.

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

AOL Issues Reports Near Cardiff, Wales

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in Cardiff and nearby locations:

• 
  Steve West Says - Support PTSD & Cricket (@FIRSTCHAIRMAN) reported 4 minutes ago from Cardiff, Wales

  @TalkTalk Wifi for 20 years with AOL with no problems, but now 4mps is an insult

• 
  terry walton (@theterrywalton) reported 12 minutes ago from Tonyrefail, Wales

  Victor Meldrew moment! Ordered a new oven from @AOL for delivery today. Given a 7.00am until 7.00pm delivery slot. Rang now will not be delivered until next Sunday. Not informed of anything. Asked the service department about what they can do to correct it! Nothing. Cancelled.

AOL Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  joubalspacker (@joubalspacker) reported 7 minutes ago

  @thenarr47271717 @Bit_Faced @theswansjr Your analogy is a bit off Current Bitcoin is not 'The Internet' but more akin to the walled garden of America Online capable of serving only a select few... AOL was consumed by the wider permissionless network that served everybody... If BTC can only serve the masses via custodians it will be no different than a CBDC => It will be outcompeted by a freer money

• 
  alex 🏴‍☠️🇺🇸🇺🇦 (@alex) reported 8 minutes ago

  when i first worked for a big co (TC was part of AOL at the time, IIRC) I spilled a drink on my laptop and bricked it really thought i was going to get fired (I was young) and was blown away when the co was like well ****, is a new one by tomorrow fast enough?

• 
  Paul Walsh (@Paul__Walsh) reported 9 minutes ago

  People keep asking why Apple allowed OpenAI to build a ChatGPT integration for Messages. Do get to the point, I don’t think Apple anticipated a company using the permissions required by ChatGPT specifically to read, analyse and store people’s Messages when the Messages app includes iMessage and not just SMS. The entire point of iMessage is that it’s rich media *and* end to end encrypted. The permissions OpenAI needs exist for legitimate software, and Apple warns people before granting them. Backup software needs Full Disk Access to back up protected files. Security software needs it to inspect files for malicious activity. Disk utilities need it to search, recover and manage protected files. It’s similar to WebView. It gave developers a way to display parts of an app that could change without requiring a new app release and App Store review, such as terms of service, privacy policies and other remotely hosted content. In 2014, I predicted developers would eventually use WebView across every major app, with some apps built almost entirely inside it. I also warned this would create a security problem because WebView had no protection against dangerous links or malicious code typically found on webpages. Developers could make a WebView look identical to the native app, so people wouldn’t know whether they were using the app itself or interacting with a website. Today, in-app security is a multibillion dollar industry because it’s obvious that opening links inside an app might not be as safe as it should be. Most predictions, especially in the context of digital risk, are not believed by a lot of people. But they become obvious eventually. Today, I’m saying OpenAI’s ChatGPT integration with Apple Messages is more dangerous for some people than almost anything else on the market. Of course someone can take screenshots and send them to the FBI, repeat something they were told, or deliberately share a private conversation. That completely misses the point. None of those things is equivalent to giving an AI service automated access to read, analyse and store entire message histories involving everyone someone communicates with. Comparing deliberate human disclosure with automated access at scale ignores the capability that makes this fundamentally different. And why it removes the main benefit of end to end encryption. I can’t comprehend how security professionals can defend anything that undermines the purpose of end to end encryption by saying "but encryption isn’t broken". Protecting messages while they’re being transmitted means very little if an agent can systematically read, analyse and store them before they’re sent or after they’re received. Apple permissions have legitimate purposes. This particular use of them is the problem. During the early 2000s, I advocated for browser extensions. During the mid to late 2000s, before the first iPhone when mobile web didn't exist, I advocated for mobile web instead of WAP. In 2015, I advocated for chatbot integrations across messaging platforms and business tools. I’m a developer advocate, an open standards advocate, child safety advocate, and privacy advocate. I co-founded 2 W3C initiatives, including the Mobile Web Initiative, where I was tasked with rewriting Tim Berners-Lee’s vision of "One Web". And was a significant contributor to 8 technical specifications, including the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. I care about humanity. I don’t advocate for one thing in isolation from everything else. I’m a technical expert in specific areas with OSINT skills and 30 years across web, telecom, and mobile. 💡 I consider every stakeholder affected by open standards, technology, and legislation. Sometimes convenience justifies a privacy tradeoff. Sometimes privacy should take priority over security, and sometimes security should take priority over privacy. None of these should be treated as an absolute regardless of the consequences. In 2017, the PKI Consortium asked me to advise them privately and write about the impact DV SSL certificates and HTTPS Everywhere were having on anti phishing security. I faced fierce criticism from privacy advocates who argued that the connection should be encrypted even if the person on the other end was an impersonator. Those were their words. If you care, search for "Insecure Elephant in the Room". The fundamental reasons phishing works were the same when I was impersonated in 1996 when phishing was first discovered on the AOL network, the same when I wrote about it in 2017, and the same today. Now I have to argue with some security professionals defending something that undermines the purpose of end to end encryption. They need to look beyond the mechanics of software and encryption. Technology is an enabler. We need to consider human behaviour, how people will actually use a capability, and what happens when that behaviour occurs at scale. Also, the potential intent that goes beyond a website or privacy statement. I’ve faced this repeatedly over the years. Today, when I argue that government policies and age verification introduced in the name of online child safety and preventing child exploitation are actually surveillance measures, child safety advocates accuse me of not caring about children. This isn’t rocket science. Add AI to everything, even if you’re willing to accept the risks to yourself. But please don’t add AI in ways that undermine another person’s right to privacy or, depending on the context, their personal safety. Some people's lives depend on their ability to rely on end to end encryption. We're not talking about SMS. 💡Criticising the technology used to pursue an objective doesn’t mean opposing the objective.

• 
  Steve. 🇺🇸🦅 (@Stevec2255) reported 12 minutes ago

  @hetmehtaa I have an AOL install disc somewhere Will that help?

• 
  Amazing.AI. (@amazing_AI_) reported 12 minutes ago

  @ThisOldTech2 As a computer user since '94, I'm trying to figure out why I never got a browser in a box. of course, I did access the Web through AOL at the beginning. 🤔

• 
  TylerSchlittPhotography (@Stormchaser_TS) reported 13 minutes ago

  @spann They still suck. They distribute your content and you would think something like it being on MSN or yahoo AOL different platforms like that would be a sale. Nope that is a partners and they give it to them for free so you make zero dollars off of it. I happen to me. Literally one of the worst third-party brokers out.

• 
  The Watcher On The Web (@WatcherontheWeb) reported 13 minutes ago

  Oh... Just in case it hasn't sunk in yet AI being able to code as well as it does means that software as a product or service is DEAD AS A DOOR-NAIL It will probably stop twitching in about 4-5 years for most people, but expect some companies to hold on by charging subscription services until 25 years after they have become irreverent... See AOL for examples

• 
  Daknife (@DirkDaknife) reported 18 minutes ago

  @brockpierson Best of all were the PackardHell Combo sound card and modem, which would literally have IRQ conflicts with itself! I spent many a long call (AOL Tech Support in 96-98) trying to find a combination that a particular machine would accept.

• 
  Zanite (@samuel_mogbolu) reported 19 minutes ago

  I miss ragebaiting peeps on AOL with my parents desktop computer those were the days. Poor fellows didn't even know they were arguing with an 8 year old urchin

• 
  Scott Upham 🇺🇸 (@ScottUpham) reported 20 minutes ago

  @MurrayHillGuy1 This guy (me) dating history: - Dated co-worker at grocery store in college, married her after a year, divorced after 9 years. 2 beautiful daughters (who are now 33 & 31). - Dated a former co-worker briefly. - Dated a girl that IM'ed me on AOL Instant messenger, married her after 3 years, divorced after 18 years. 2 beautiful daughters (who are now 21 & 14). - Dated a younger woman (25) on a dating website for a year, bought her a ring but never proposed. Only broken heart of my life (at 50). - A few short relationships from dating apps but nothing longer than 1-2 months. - Long distance relationship with a younger woman I met on IG (we had a mutual). Lasted 4 years but recently fizzled. Back to Square 1!