AOL outages and service status in Portsmouth, Virginia

Problems in the last 24 hours in Portsmouth, Virginia

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

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

• 
  -tonyapopeee; (@tonyapopeee) reported 13 minutes ago from Portsmouth Heights, Virginia

  The internet just completely freaked me out. I’m reading an article on BET website and they asked if I wanna sign up for email alerts..BUT they already had my old AOL email address in the box..WTF 😳

• 
  Dr. ManHampton (@DrHankMccoy06) reported 17 minutes ago from Portsmouth Heights, Virginia

  @80suburbia @johnnylocal I know someone who was still paying for AOL as of this year. This year. They never cancelled and them jokers kept charging

• 
  SSJGarland (@ImaGStukes) reported 21 minutes ago from Portsmouth Heights, Virginia

  @78NIKatNITE @nodqdotcom WCW didn’t fail because of him it was because of AOL and let’s stop this notion that AEW is close to what WCW was to the WWE. You fanboys wanna go so hard for them and they have been doing nothing but regressing

• 
  Chris Skotarczak (@Skobi1kanobi) reported 22 minutes ago from Chesapeake Mobile Home Park, Virginia

  @joncoopertweets ****…so close. I had CAT 4 cables and AOL sign on noise

• 
  James Davis 💚💛 (@James90Davis) reported 26 minutes ago from Norfolk, Virginia

  You never know how many AOL or MSN emails there are until you become a Realtor.

• 
  Christie (@Christie_Baer) reported 33 minutes ago from Norfolk, Virginia

  and here my girlfriend is with a god damn AOL email 😂

AOL Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  RacistWiggerBassTARD (@kekusGhostRadio) reported 8 minutes ago

  @MrBurnsLovesYou AOL days when I was a YW (young ****** age 12) i'd message chicks I didnt know that id pee in their butt. Im back on that **** now.

• 
  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.

• 
  Thomas Olenik (@TomOlenik) reported 13 minutes ago

  @signorina37H 56k was blazing fast. I was an AOL customer beefier they went public with a 14.4k modem in a 486-66 machine and a whopping 8 MB RAM.

• 
  PsychoPNut (@NotPsychoPNut) reported 19 minutes ago

  @RealAlexJones Viruses are boring. I used punters on AOL, NetBus, and Sub7 on IRC victims. I made a script on mIRC, and when someone /joins the #channel, it would send them porn.exe; when they for sure open it, it would pop up a MsgBox "porn is broken rofl.", vbCritical, "oops". #1337h4x0r

• 
  💥Chris Barrett - Platinum Gay💥 (@ThePlatinumGay) reported 21 minutes ago

  @CliveSimpson63 Holy crap. You guys had AOL too? I knew you had access to the internet because I talked to many Brits back then. I guess it just never occurred to me y’all were using AOL as well! LOL

• 
  Billszmafia (@Babobooey) reported 25 minutes ago

  @fekdaoui @bot mine barely made it past set up before shutting me down for 7 days. "Bot credits" according to Grok. Grok Bot is is still in AOL dialup stage. Needs work and some tweaks badly. Save you money

• 
  DOT_Singularity🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸 (@DOT_singularity) reported 25 minutes ago

  @SteveMoraco Boo- friggidty-hooo, This is nothing new. I want the AI to be able to pull in context from **** I wrote on AOL in 1995. My online **** game was strong! If you're Laboring under some expectation of ever having true privacy in the digital world , it's a fools errand. Crack on.

• 
  Anil Gupta (@anilk04) reported 27 minutes ago

  @barandbench @_arnaC_ Complete waste of time of NGT and SC in such issues. Their shouldn't have been any case in the first place. Yamuna gets polluted, encroached by illegal dumping and construction, but NGT does not do anything. But they become very active on AOL 2 day event on damaging environment!!

• 
  ._. (@CanadaDry42) reported 27 minutes ago

  @no1eliofan For the vast vast vast majority of players, you could talk to your friends over the phone, message them over AOL, or just see them the next day at school So why write down a message onto mail, give it to a pokemon, and trade them that pokemon to send a message?

• 
  Just an old Marine (@needtobuild) reported 30 minutes ago

  @theikigaiguy @amazon Yep, same thing day after day. And history will repeat. A company thinks it’s infallible, but lose one customer here another there. And it adds up. Before long they become Sears, Kmart and AOL. IMO; They will end up splitting shopping and prime off eventually.