AOL outages and service status in Braidwood, Scotland

Problems in the last 24 hours in Braidwood, Scotland

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

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

• 
  Kirstlee (@lammiek) reported 12 minutes ago from Braidwood, Scotland

  @AOLSupportHelp They don’t know what my problem is yet so how can they give me the resolution 🤔

• 
  Kirstlee (@lammiek) reported 22 minutes ago from Braidwood, Scotland

  @AOLSupportHelp AOL is a nightmare. I need access to my emails and can’t get any support. 72 hours wait is ridiculous 😡

AOL Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  The Tall Traveler (@TallTraveler1) reported 9 minutes ago

  AOL sports and music message boards was my ****

• 
  Business Nerd (@Business_Nerd_) reported 10 minutes ago

  Marc Andreessen on the exact moment the Internet changed forever: "There are two Internets," Marc explains. "There's the Internet that existed before 1993 and the Internet that existed after 1993." Before 1993, the Internet was funded by the National Science Foundation as an academic and research network. Commercial activity was strictly prohibited under what was called the acceptable use policy. The result was something the people who lived through it still describe in utopian terms. @pmarca describes it like this: "People who were on the Internet before 1993 often describe it in utopian terms because it literally was like you take the whatever million smartest people in the world and you put them on a network together with like no commercial activity, no advertising, no nothing, just the million smartest people in the world. And you just like let them talk to each other. And it's just like amazing." He singles out Usenet, the old messaging system, as the centerpiece of that world: "The discussions on Usenet were just like absolutely spectacular… It was like the most pure, clean intellectual, like vibrant space sense, like, I don't know, Athens in 500 BC. It was just like this amazing phenomenon." Then AOL connected. In September 1993, AOL plugged its million or two million subscribers. Normal people into the Internet for the first time. That moment got a name: eternal September. It was the day the Internet stopped being an ivory tower and became a mainstream consumer thing. The "eternal" part is its own joke. Marc explains: "Concept of eternal September literally was, it was like when every new wave of college graduates graduated and got their first job and then went online. So September is when the new crop of Internet users showed up… So the September effect didn't just happen once. It like happened over and over and over and over and over again. And every cycle of Internet user would basically be like, oh my God, this is great. But like, it's all going to get ruined in September." The Internet we live in today is the result of roughly 30 of those Septembers stacked on top of each other. Marc is careful to say he's pro that shift. He was on the side of opening it up, allowing commerce, allowing advertising, connecting everyone. But he doesn't pretend the trade-off wasn't real. You can't take a network of the smartest million people on earth, connect it to everyone, and expect the texture of the conversation to survive. The lesson sits underneath the story. Every great network has a pre-commercial phase that the early users remember as paradise, and a post-commercial phase that actually changes the world. Both are real. You don't get the second without giving up the first.

• 
  politicalGRAFFITI (@politicalGRAF) reported 12 minutes ago

  @GarlicRush 19 I never used AOL

• 
  GodfearingCitizen 🍊 (@halfawake11114) reported 16 minutes ago

  @ThrillaRilla369 Darn it mine was and still is an AOL one, thought that was the worst age wise

• 
  ginger spice (@legallyging) reported 16 minutes ago

  @Boblhead truly!! was at a restaurant today and someone's ringtone was the AOL dial-up tone. ended up going down a rabbithole bc of that

• 
  Simon Khalaf (@Simonkhalaf) reported 20 minutes ago

  @markpinc @jonoringer Consider the source. Buying junk assets and milk them for cash. Not a bad business, but there is no reason to say that how others are doing it is wrong. I ran AOL, and I know.

• 
  MichaelJensen1 (@_Kadmos1) reported 20 minutes ago

  It was dumb for the AOL Time Warner, Disney-Fox, and AT&T Time Warner mergers to happen. It is wrong for Paramount Skydance trying to get WB Discovery. Fox Corp getting Tubi was fine but Roku is not. Reason I am fine with Fox Corp getting Tubi is because the buy-out was a lot smaller. Now, if the Fox Corp never bought Tubi but just bought Roku, I would be a bit less opposed because they would have one less big streaming platform.

• 
  N.I.Veteran (@GanglSepp) reported 23 minutes ago

  Kids today will never know true frustration, like we had back in the day, waiting ( whilst listening to it scream ) for AOL to connect to the internet on a dial-up modem... only for someone in the house to pick up the phone! 📞💻😩📶

• 
  🕊🎶Päm Schoen♡ (@OznovaPam) reported 23 minutes ago

  @Hitchslap1 Oh, this is funny. Did I ever tell you about the time I got one of my first jobs early on AOL? I was a moderator for the men’s message boards. They never knew their moderator was a woman. They just saw my title “moderator.” It was interesting to watch the dynamics of the different boards I was in charge of.

• 
  🔻agitprop + absurdity🔻 (@agtprpnabsrdty) reported 24 minutes ago

  Different decade, same math: half the S&P 500 is priced at levels that a dot-com CEO called proof of investor insanity while watching his company crater 90%. The rotation at the top: In early 2000, the ten most valuable S&P 500 companies read like a monument to permanent dominance: Microsoft, General Electric, Cisco, Walmart, ExxonMobil, Intel, Lucent, IBM, Citigroup, AOL. A generation later, only Microsoft remains. GE was carved into three separate companies. Lucent was absorbed by Nokia. AOL became the cautionary tale attached to the worst merger in corporate history. Cisco and Intel spent 25 years climbing back to their dot-com peaks. Citigroup, IBM, Walmart, and ExxonMobil still exist, but none crack the top ten. The new top ten is Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, and the AI infrastructure complex. Investors in 2000 were also certain they were buying the future's permanent giants. The data says most of today's winners won't be in the top ten a generation from now either, and there is no mechanism by which you find out which ones survive in advance. The valuation problem: In 2002, after Sun Microsystems collapsed 90%, CEO Scott McNealy explained to investors exactly what a 10x sales multiple actually demands: 100% of revenues paid as dividends for ten consecutive years, with zero costs, zero R&D, zero taxes, and zero employees. He was describing the math of the price investors had paid for his stock as a form of collective psychosis. Today, 51% of the S&P 500 by market cap trades above 10x sales. Half the index. The AI narrative is functioning as the dot-com narrative functioned: a story compelling enough to make the math feel optional. The math has never been optional.