AOL outages and service status in Jurupa Valley, California

Problems in the last 24 hours in Jurupa Valley, California

The chart below shows the number of AOL reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Jurupa Valley, California 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 Jurupa Valley, California

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in Jurupa Valley and nearby locations:

• 
  Joseph Haygood (@mclazyj) reported 39 minutes ago from Riverside, California

  @Tentaskyr @FoppinArts I could never make a change. I have used mclazyj going back to before I was married. It was my original AOL handle in 1995

• 
  Dennis Stillman (@findem_ds) reported 56 minutes ago from Riverside, California

  @atlasshrugs2018 @AOL Plus this has been substantiated and reported by Left media in the NY Times & Washington Post. There are many articles on mail in voter fraud and to do this nationality is a complete debacle. This shouldn't be a contentious issue which shows you how desperate the Dems are.

AOL Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  Daniil (@DaniilBuilds) reported 3 minutes ago

  AOL and Time Warner didn’t just pay for what the two companies were worth in January 2000. They paid for what they believed the two companies could become together. The announced merger was valued at roughly $350B, with AOL shareholders expected to own about 55% of the combined company. The logic was easy to understand: combine AOL’s internet business with Time Warner’s media assets and create value neither could generate alone. But there was a financial problem hiding inside that logic. Future synergies are uncertain. The merger closed in January 2001. SEC disclosures later put the acquisition cost at approximately $147B. Then came the accounting reckoning. In 2002, the combined company reported a $98.7B net loss, including a $54.2B goodwill impairment. That $54.2B was non-cash. It did not mean the company suddenly paid out $54.2B in cash. It meant the value previously assigned to acquired goodwill could no longer be supported at the same level. That distinction matters. When you pay upfront for future synergies, you are effectively putting a price on value that still depends on execution. If the synergies arrive, the premium can make sense. If they don’t, shareholders can end up carrying the cost. The most expensive synergy is the one you pay for before you prove it exists.

• 
  💥Chris Barrett - Platinum Gay💥 (@ThePlatinumGay) reported 3 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

• 
  Fred Johnston (@JohnstonFredJ) reported 5 minutes ago

  @getwhatugive @LynAldenContact You’re collapsing the product and the protocol. BlackRock/MSTR make money if demand for bitcoin rises. Demand rises when access gets easier: brokerage accounts, 401ks, treasuries, Lightning, hardware wallets. Shrinking the buyer pool would hurt their bags. That’s the opposite incentive of “reduce access.” Early internet had AOL too. Walled gardens expanded the user base first. The open network still won because the protocol wasn’t owned by AOL.Same here. An ETF is not a modem ban. Anyone can still run a node, hold keys, and send sats. Institutions can offer a wrapper. They cannot revoke the chain. “Gemini agrees” is not an argument. The music-sharing analogy also fails: Napster was illegal and centralized. Bitcoin settles on a public ledger. You don’t sterilize that by listing a ticker.

• 
  Lawrence L. Wood (@LLawrence74685) reported 5 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.

• 
  Jackson Styles (@Jackez89) reported 6 minutes ago

  @theamelia___ 19, Australia never got AOL

• 
  Kitty 🐈 Ⓜ️🕸MikeCryptoLife 🛡🐈 (@mikecryptolife) reported 8 minutes ago

  @theswansjr Internet isn't a good example. It's like saying ohhh we can see because there is light, name something that's replaced light. You should ask about AOL, Netscape, napster type ****. Those were the Bitcoins of internet

• 
  Horus (@DoxxieDonut) reported 10 minutes ago

  @TheDrugMoney This goes back to the limewire/AOL music server debate. Like cable vs Netflix. You just don't know what you want unless you see it in front of you. You may not need everything you lay your eyes on but you'll enjoy ******** out of it

• 
  Roger Douglas Ware (@RDWareEsqu1re) reported 17 minutes ago

  @mariza_hofer Desperate people, don't **** with them. They can't be predicted in any meaningful fashion. Imo. I was tech support for the world's first chat based communities. AOL and Prodigy and V.B.B.S. I can say this I got catfished once, and a 17 year relationship was the results. Favour of god to your unity with an equal and opposite force. My dignity is all that keeps me from flirtatious decorum. Will be looking for someone of quality to refer to you for inspection.

• 
  T s (@Ts7705421096234) reported 25 minutes ago

  @harryjsisson Cool. Mapquest is a thing again. Maybe I will stop getting **** for using my aol email from 30 years ago. Every thing comes back into style?

• 
  𝗝𝗼𝗲 𝗥𝗼𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗼 (@joerosato) reported 30 minutes ago

  @Dan_Jeffries1 Gates never said this. In the 1990s, Microsoft focused on proprietary online networks (MSN) rather than the 'internet'. Think AOL. The 'internet' was a side product you got by connecting to their proprietary service. Downplaying to be the source of connection = marketing 😐