AOL outages and service status in Bude, England

Problems in the last 24 hours in Bude, England

The chart below shows the number of AOL reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Bude, England 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

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  ⚡imp0stor⚡₿ (@x_imp0stor) reported 7 minutes ago

  @FullMetalTrav I was the architect of the AOL help page deployment on the vendor side for 10 or so years. I optimized and redeployed the entire stack more than one time. It took around 52 servers to handle the traffic spikes and was split between 2 data centers w/ failover.

• 
  Xavier Damman 🌍🔅 (@xdamman) reported 7 minutes ago

  Wow surprisingly tone deaf post from an @openai top executive. Feels like AOL or Compuserve arguing about how dangerous and bad for innovation an open internet would be. Permissionless innovation. That’s what open weight models offer.

• 
  Paul Walsh (@Paul__Walsh) reported 9 minutes ago

  I hate digging into my credentials, but in the context of online child safety and child exploitation, they matter because governments and child safety lobbyists are railroading everyone with personal opinions based on dangerous ideology. Being a parent doesn't qualify me to say what actually works, what' doesn't, and what the cost is in relation to privacy. I've spent more years building standards, API services, filtering technologies, and content moderation techniques than just about anyone. Very few experts sit at the intersection of internet infrastructure, telecommunications, app security, child exploitation detection technology, and content classification and filtering; I'm one of them. People with my background are being entirely ignored by policymakers for a reason. We know what's technically possible, what's not, and the catastrophic costs of getting it wrong. Security isn't just at odds with convenience, it's almost always fundamentally at odds with privacy. I built my first website 30 years ago, and was introduced to online child safety and content moderation that same year, in 1996, when I joined AOL. At the time, I helped launch new technologies and ran global testing for the launch of AIM, AOL's instant messenger and the internet's first consumer instant messaging app. I co-founded the W3C standard for content labelling and web classification, and in 2004, co-invented the concept of classifying internet accounts (labelling them by risk, identity, or purpose). I foresaw that the future of online trust and safety required filtering accounts, not just websites and web pages. Features like Twitter's verified checkmark and LinkedIn's verification are implementations of this very idea - they just got it wrong. I've run operational calls with The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) and the US Department of Justice on the automation of monitoring, detection and reporting, and I signed an MOU with NCMEC to help combat exploitation through browser software and mobile security services that my teams built for online child safety. The keyword tracking list Thorn shared with partners came from me over 15 years ago, inherited from a colleague who built it for CEOP while seconded from AOL. I also advised IWF. My team built the first child safety API service for mobile device OEMs, an even deeper kind of device-level scanning than Chat Control. Samsung was set to embed it in every device they sold, and Apple planned to put it in the settings of every iPhone, iPad, and Mac, around 1.3 billion devices between them. So I know what this kind of technology can and can't do on a phone, and I know what it costs in terms of end user privacy. Both deals drifted away because we were too early, one of the hardest things about being a tech founder. Years later, Samsung and Apple built parental controls so good that a parent can now block any app or website on a child's phone in a couple of minutes. When I was interviewed on BBC Newsnight 14 years ago, it was to demonstrate how bad parental controls were. Now I'm telling you they're as good as I could possibly hope for. Most leading security companies license my patents for in-app security, covering more than 50 categories of classification, including anti-phishing, malware, child abuse, pornography, and disinformation. Chat Control 2.0 mandates client-side scanning of links for apps like Signal. Luckily of Signal, they require my permission or face infringing in my patents. I'm *extremely* unlikely (read that as never) to license my patents for the purpose of government mandated censorship. I have declined governments in the past and I will do it again in the future.

• 
  Ya Filthy Animal (@PatSoxCeltBruin) reported 13 minutes ago

  @TrollFootball While this is true, I can’t really talk ****, when I was 19 I was stocking can’s on a shelf and spent my nights on AOL messenger.

• 
  Jean Ames (@AmesJean6) reported 16 minutes ago

  I spent 13 years at Southern Bell which became Bell South. Then the government took over and destroyed it. They were forced to rent their network to rivals like HBO and AOL. I sent the bills. 6 years at Motorola. After 9/11 40k of us were laid off.

• 
  Kenny Evitt (@KennyEvitt) reported 16 minutes ago

  @bayesiandroll Wow – that's early! I'm sure there was probably at least one BBS local to me, but I never knew of any until AOL and CompuServe were enough of a thing.

• 
  Novafan (@Novafan78910) reported 17 minutes ago

  @mar70854f @nemywtf @itskwasi You have to get an undergraduate degree before you go for a PHD retard Zuck and gates were mega geniuses going to harvard. Zuck had a job offer from AOL in high school. Much different from 99.9% of you retards who say “well an immaterial amount of rich people don’t have degrees”

• 
  Dr. David Burkus (@davidburkus) reported 18 minutes ago

  WSJ profiled Bending Spoons this week — the Milan company that owns AOL, Evernote, and Vimeo, run by executives in their 30s and staffed by people who are sometimes younger than the software they've been hired to fix. It's actually a story about why so many applicants never make it through the door. Hundreds of thousands apply every year — enough that the rejection rate makes Harvard look like an easy yes — and most of them are optimizing for the wrong thing: credentials, polish, a great answer to "tell me about yourself." Almost anyone can be gracious to the person deciding their future. It's how they treat someone who can't do anything for them that's hard to fake. Last year: roughly 800,000 applications, 286 hires, an acceptance rate near 0.04% — tighter than Citadel's famously selective quant recruiting (0.36%), something like a hundred times harder than Harvard. That selectivity isn't a gut call. A dedicated team inside the company grades every interview against fixed criteria, then tracks how each hire performs months and years later, feeding the results back into the model. CEO Luca Ferrari has said the signal his team weights hardest is exactly this — how a candidate treats the people who have zero power over the outcome: the assistant, the receptionist. Not decency theater. Data: how you act in front of power is a performance; how you act in front of none is closer to the truth. That gap gets coded straight into the model, right alongside the interview scores. I'd bet you've done the reverse of this in the last week without noticing — warm with your boss, a little short with someone who couldn't do anything for you either way. Most companies say they hire for character. Very few test it anywhere the candidate isn't being watched by someone who can help them. Worth trying on your own team — just notice who's kind to the person who can't do anything for them.

• 
  Sabretooth | Exchequer (@SabretoothSG) reported 23 minutes ago

  Crypto has hit a local maxima, like the internet did in 1998. How you monetize currently in crypto is to clip trading volume. The users doing volume are traders. so everything ships for traders, perps, options, CEXes, dexes, launchpads, etc... Build for traders and you get instant traction. build for anyone else and you get crickets, so the traction data says traders are the only market, and the capital follows the traction data. in 1998 every serious internet company was a portal. Yahoo, Excite, Lycos, AOL, Infoseek. the metric was traffic. Everything was built to keep the user on the page, because the user on the page was the business. Search was actively deprioritized. A good search engine sends the user away, which is negative stickiness, which made search a bad product. In 1999 Excite passed on buying Google for under a million dollars. In 2000 Yahoo hired Google to power its own search results, because search was a cost center you outsourced. We are in the portal era of crypto. The Google of crypto will not show immediate traction. Google didn't. It sent users away, made no money, and looked like a toy to every smart person grading it on 1998's metric. If you want immediate traction, the market has plenty for you. Go find the next pump fun. The next Aster. The next shiny thing traders rotate into for three weeks. The next big thing requires conviction about what crypto is for, not what does volume in the next 30 days.

• 
  Jake🍁🇨🇦🏳️‍🌈 🇵🇸🇺🇦 (@RabidCoo) reported 35 minutes ago

  @lilhousgreendor I never had an AOL email address. Which doesn't help making me not feel old