AOL outages and service status in Bronxville, New York

Problems in the last 24 hours in Bronxville, New York

The chart below shows the number of AOL reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Bronxville, New York 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 Bronxville, New York

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

• 
  Laura (@ldollaz_) reported 4 minutes ago from New Rochelle, New York

  I hate telling people I still have a AOL account, but when they tell me they still use Yahoo and hotmail....I don’t feel bad at all.

• 
  Mike (@allsenseaside) reported 30 minutes ago from Mount Vernon, New York

  @OMEGAJACKSON914 Also I dunno who Keith Lee is but I appreciate your current name either way. My first AOL **** was Lando Calripkenjr haha.

• 
  🐱✨ (@Kitttiiieee) reported 52 minutes ago from Yonkers, New York

  @loveliestlor This was my first and favorite phone! As a teen I never cared to get a cell phone until this came out because I was always on aol/aim and only liked texting and not actually talking on the phone...not much has changed tbh lol

AOL Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  CEOInterviews.AI (@CEOinterview) reported 6 minutes ago

  An early Polygon investor ran the comparison against his own position. Yat Siu @ysiu puts the value split at 90 to 95 percent to the application that owns the customer, with gas fees going to the chain underneath. Polymarket's private valuation is 8 billion dollars. Polygon, the chain Polymarket is built on, is a lot smaller. His analogy is the mid 90s, when AOL bought Time Warner and the ISPs were the giants of the moment. AT&T is worth a lot of money today. It is smaller than Google, Apple and Nvidia. Critical infrastructure keeps getting built. It stops being the biggest company in the room.

• 
  🌻 (@Heartofgold4422) reported 7 minutes ago

  Back in the AOL days I could hang out in the baseball chat rooms all evening. Now, I make one comment in on a post, just playim around & people get all fuggin serious & lecturey 🙄

• 
  Robert (@RobertKidd0x) reported 8 minutes ago

  I'm old enough to remember the days when people said the internet would never catch on and just be a fad. Look how far we've come from dial-up and AOL. We're at a similar beginning now with AI. When change is unavoidable, you have to embrace it, if you are to survive.

• 
  LStrick 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 🇺🇸 (@LRanlo1) reported 13 minutes ago

  @RazorRamone76 too bad we can force them to hear the hooking up loop that was awful on an endless loop (AOL)

• 
  JovanHuttonPulitzer™ אני לא סובל טיפשים! (@JovanHPulitzer) reported 14 minutes ago

  @RWMaloneMD #HistoryMatters - seeing your uninformed Virgina rant on #DateCenters thought I might give you something to reflect upon: AOL started in Northern Virginia. It began in 1985 in Vienna as Quantum Computer Services, became America Online, and in 1996 moved its headquarters to Dulles/Ashburn in Loudoun County. Around the same time, UUNet/WorldCom was nearby. Those companies pulled in fiber and built early server facilities. Even more important was MAE-East (Metropolitan Area Exchange–East), one of the first big internet exchange points. It started in Fairfax County / Tysons around 1992 and later moved to Loudoun to sit closer to AOL and the other networks. At one point a huge share of U.S. internet traffic passed through it. Once networks had to meet there to exchange traffic, everyone else followed. Equinix built early Ashburn facilities for that reason. After the dot-com bust, AOL faded, but it left behind unused “dark fiber,” empty buildings, and a dense interconnection hub. Local officials later marketed that leftover infrastructure to data-center developers. AOL’s old campus itself has been torn down or converted into more data centers. Why it kept growing after AOL The cluster stuck because of a pile-on of advantages: Fiber density and low latency. Once the exchanges and carriers were there, it became the cheapest, fastest place to interconnect. A commonly cited figure is that a large share of global internet traffic still touches Loudoun. Proximity to Washington. Federal agencies, defense contractors, and intelligence work created early demand for secure computing nearby. Power and land. Dominion Energy power was relatively cheap and available. Eastern Loudoun still had large industrial parcels near Dulles when the boom started. Tax policy. Virginia added a sales-and-use tax exemption on data-center equipment (servers, generators, cooling, etc.) around 2008–2010. That became one of the state’s biggest economic-development incentives and made Virginia hard to beat on cost. Network effects. Each new data center made the next one more valuable, because customers want to be next to other networks, clouds, and content providers. So: AOL and MAE-East planted the flag in the 1990s. Cheap power, leftover fiber, DC proximity, and later tax breaks turned a local internet hub into the world’s largest data-center market. Ashburn/Loudoun is still the core; growth has since spilled into Prince William and other Virginia counties as land and power in the original alley got scarce.

• 
  Sir Ernest Shackleton (@ErniShackleton) reported 14 minutes ago

  @MapQuest Who ******** used map quest anymore. I thought it died along with AOL

• 
  Big Sean Corduroy Don Jr (@universalken88) reported 14 minutes ago

  @whiteboysumer you want me to be upset? online? like interacting with a complete stranger that doesn’t know me or anything about me…could upset me? im 38 yrs old. i cant be upset by strangers online. i was in AOL chat rooms when this **** was fun. what ethics?

• 
  Paul Walsh (@Paul__Walsh) reported 22 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.

• 
  Lawrence L. Wood (@LLawrence74685) reported 25 minutes ago

  @brockpierson Read a tech history of AOL and you might get a historical education of the internet service business and it's startup.

• 
  Rich (@RichardWyl39256) reported 31 minutes ago

  @SeaeyesTri I remember setting up my dial up connection on AOL. It was so slow back then