AOL outages and service status in Rutherfordton, North Carolina

Problems in the last 24 hours in Rutherfordton, North Carolina

The chart below shows the number of AOL reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Rutherfordton, North Carolina 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:

• 
  Skeptical *** (@SkepticalAss) reported 4 minutes ago

  @ChuckGrassley WTH is this crap? Did you hire some teenagers to post AOL speak on your congressional X account?

• 
  Lazarus (@Lazarus_Capital) reported 5 minutes ago

  @stocktrader989 stock i responded to your tweet "The current debt, interest expense, colo fees and no chance to make profits are reasons not to invest in $CRWV and responded with: "They’ve pioneered the way for neoclouds to get financing with Iran literally copying their DDTL structure, are bringing down their weighted cost of debt, improving margins, and focusing on the higher return business (cloud vs Colo). Their debt is a function of levering up to improve their returns. Their financing ability is actually so good that they’re giving up prepayments since that would weigh down their returns. They’re playing chess while $IREN is figuring out how checkers work" Either you dont understand what im saying or deliberately trying to twist what im saying. If theyre the pioneer in financing, they will be definition (very likely) have more debt compared to "peers", also, I stated they pioneered the way for them to get financing. Im not sure why youre repeatedly trying to paint it as my bull thesis rests on them being first. No. That was a stab at Iran since they literally copied their financing structure. Setting up that if you argue against CRWV's financing, youre basically saying your darling was is following their stupidity. Up to you if you want to make that argument. "Backward looking showing massive improvement- WRONG" I literally said its backward looking in response to you looking at their recent current state financials when theyre going through a grow phase. Literally triple digit YoY rev growth, not to mention ARR and rev backlog. Q1 revs of $2b against a $100B rev backlog. Where do you think the valuation is coming from? Whats happening to their compute deals? How can you model out how much they will earn? By looking at: "Revenue Backlog, RPU & financing- doesn’t hold water". With these names you need to be looking at how theyre executing, what direction theyre going, their rate of growth, margin direction, backlog, etc. IREN for example: missing their own cloud ARR targets, GPU rental prices weakening against a bullish backdrop, ARR growth with no regards to margin, margin compression and return deterioration, lots of power sitting doing nothing while peers have sold out. NBIS for example you did something similar by showing the last 2 Qs that theyre losing money. Yes, theyre building, investment cycle, they will have negative cash flows, look beyond that. I really try to engage and help others learn, and I love to test my thesis against others, sometimes with a little sarcasm and trash talking. I addressed your debt concerns and pointed you to where the value will come from. I dont like addressing someone's concerns and they brush it off like i didnt respond, instead choosing to focus on something I didnt even say like you did here "Pioneers ofter don’t win. Examples 1. Internet- AOL/ Yahoo 2. IPhones- Blackberry 3. BTC mining- Mara $CRWV is slightly improving but still a failed company" I especially dont like when people twist my words, or worse, accuse me of "changing your argument to try to meet your objective".

• 
  Brian Cohen (@inthepixels) reported 6 minutes ago

  The Greatest Corporate Losses in History: The 25 Worst Single-Year Losses Ever Recorded Financial history is often taught through famous failures such as Enron, Lehman Brothers, WorldCom, or Bear Stearns. Yet many of the largest corporate losses ever recorded were far larger than those household-name disasters. In several cases, a single year's loss exceeded $100 billion when adjusted for inflation. The list of the worst annual losses reveals a striking pattern: nearly all occurred during either the dot-com and telecom collapse of 2000–2002 or the Global Financial Crisis of 2008–2009. While some losses reflected genuine economic destruction, many were massive write-downs of acquisitions made during periods of speculative excess. Below are the 25 largest annual corporate losses ever recorded, ranked by inflation-adjusted value. The Top 25 Largest Annual Corporate Losses of All Time 1. **AOL Time Warner (2002)** — Lost $98.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$143.1 billion** today. The failed AOL-Time Warner merger remains the largest annual corporate loss ever recorded. 2. **AIG (2008)** — Lost $99.3 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$127.6 billion** today, driven by the mortgage and derivatives meltdown. 3. **JDS Uniphase (2001)** — Lost $56.1 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$104.4 billion** today after the telecom bubble collapsed. 4. **Fannie Mae (2009)** — Lost $74.4 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$93.7 billion** today. 5. **Fannie Mae (2008)** — Lost $59.8 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$64.2 billion** today. 6. **Freddie Mac (2008)** — Lost $50.8 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$54.5 billion** today. 7. **Qwest Communications (2002)** — Lost $35.9 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$44.8 billion** today. 8. **General Motors (2007)** — Lost $38.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$41.6 billion** today. 9. **Royal Bank of Scotland (2008)** — Lost $34.9 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$37.5 billion** today. 10. **General Motors (1992)** — Lost $23.5 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$37.4 billion** today. 11. **General Motors (2008)** — Lost $30.9 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$33.2 billion** today. 12. **Deutsche Telekom (2002)** — Lost €24.6 billion nominally (~$24 billion USD at the time), equivalent to over **$30.0 billion** today following massive 3G spectrum write-downs. 13. **Vivendi Universal (2002)** — Lost €23.3 billion nominally (~$23 billion USD at the time), equivalent to over **$30.0 billion** today after its debt-fueled acquisition spree unraveled. 14. **Citigroup (2008)** — Lost $27.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$29.7 billion** today. 15. **Vodafone Group (2006)** — Lost $25.8 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$29.2 billion** today. 16. **Freddie Mac (2009)** — Lost $25.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$26.9 billion** today. 17. **Vodafone Group (2002)** — Lost $19.3 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$24.4 billion** today. 18. **United Airlines (2005)** — Lost $21.2 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$24.3 billion** today. 19. **Nippon Telegraph and Telephone (NTT) (2002)** — Lost over ¥2 trillion nominally, equivalent to over **$21.0 billion** today as Japan's telecom bubble burst. 20. **Nakheel (2009)** — Lost $20.9 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$21.8 billion** today amid Dubai's property collapse. 21. **UBS (2008)** — Lost $18.7 billion nominally, equivalent to approximately **$20.1 billion** today, marking the largest annual loss in Swiss corporate history at the time. 22. **Credit Suisse (2008)** — Lost over $18.5 billion nominally, equivalent to over **$20.0 billion** today, hit heavily by toxic mortgage-backed securities.

• 
  Agenda Apex (@AgendaApex) reported 6 minutes ago

  Oh, wonderful. Another glowing obituary for the 2010 Bitcoin faucet. Yes, we missed it while we were out here perfecting the art of burning movies and waiting for AOL to stop screaming. Thanks for the reminder that our 'get rich slow' scheme was actually just 'get rich never.' Next up: time machine crowdfunding?

• 
  CheapAstronomy (@CheapAstronomy) reported 6 minutes ago

  @ThrillaRilla369 Anyone else remember the AOL discs where you got 50 hours on AOL dialup for free? You could connect with them and signup your fake account, then login with your real AOL account. Bonus, when AOL had "bring your own access," it only cost $5 per month.

• 
  DPR56X (@DPR56X) reported 9 minutes ago

  @Wajson_Crack I was using Netscape back in those days. Netscape is a browser- like Duck or Brave or FoxFire- Big competition back then to be the Browser king between netscape and ms internet explorer, then AOL stepped in and acquired netscape as their own in their platform. The 80's was the mad rush to claim the Everests of tech. I was in IT back then- even did the in person lecture series for certifications for MS. GIANT 4-5 inch wide binders of microsoft crap -carried with you into hours upon hours of MS lectures. LOL

• 
  Mike (@Boston__Sucks) reported 9 minutes ago

  @mysteriouskat I thankfully learned about this phenomenon early. Going back to AOL instant messenger days. I remember talking to friends via chat just felt off and I perceived them differently. I didn't like it. One of the reasons I never joined Facebook once it took off to "find friends"

• 
  Tesh (@Sate34) reported 11 minutes ago

  @AvaVtuber_ 18 and I'm 42. Never hadanAOL address or a water bed. I did have an AOL screen name.

• 
  At the speed in which they... (@LumpySpaceTaco) reported 11 minutes ago

  @OrevaZSN Internet back in the 90s: Here's 100 AOL CD's you didn't ask for that give you a large amount of connection time for free AI now: I only speak to people who pay for tokens. But here is 1 token use it wisely you ***** *spits in poor peoples face*

• 
  🔻agitprop + absurdity🔻 (@agtprpnabsrdty) reported 12 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.