Reading this article is a great reminder that we all need to disconnect and ground ourselves again. My brain (and likely most of ours) just can't handle 100% up-time all day and needs that break.

Tangent - I used to go cycling a lot, and required a lot less wall/river-staring then. Of the people I knew who I cycled with, 95% of us were coping with some kind of mental health issue in some way and had found our fix on the bike. I miss it.

Edit- rereading this, you’re obviously talking about scale. The original article is much better : https://cybernews.com/security/global-data-leak-exposes-bill...

"They" is exclusive. "We" is inclusive. One goes with the other. The point I was getting at was that when you use that language in a discussion it comes off as if you are directly involved, rather than commenting from the outside, or having an opinion.

I didn't want you to use "we" either :) Here's your comment, rewritten twice, that fits in better with HN rules and avoids emotion:

> The left are also absolutely shameless about lying and feel no obligation to stick to facts or data, but rather appeal to and cultivate ignorance, binary thinking, fear, us-versus-them thinking, and scapegoating. In short, the left's propaganda is more effective because they lean into it being propaganda.

> The right are also absolutely shameless about lying and feel no obligation to stick to facts or data, but rather appeal to and cultivate ignorance, binary thinking, fear, us-versus-them thinking, and scapegoating. In short, the right's propaganda is more effective because they lean into it being propaganda.

As you can see, I couldn't tell which side you were talking about. I hope the above example helps. A lot of political discussion denigrates to us-vs-them. It is not helpful.

Amen to that. I am currently cc'd on a thread between two third-parties, each hucking LLM generated emails at each other that are getting longer and longer. I don't think either of them are reading or thinking about the responses they are writing at this point.

The roadmap just makes the whole thing user-facing so there's a status in Teams of where you currently are. But IT knew all along. And if IT didn't have tools deployed to get this info already count yourself lucky to work at an immature org security-wise.

https://reddit.nerdvpn.de/r/mildlyinfuriating/comments/1gg37...

Brevity has value. Having to bloat content (an email to get past anti-spam; a cooking blog to rank better within Google SEO; ...) brings back memories of high-school english papers, or the modern equivalent ChatGPT.

From KCFs perspective where I worked, during my time there, I fundraised my salary (expenses) personally “door to door” to keep any funds donated to the organization going direct to the kids and community. I understood this was the case for others as well. I believe Bram paid for flights out of his own pocket.

I think one challenge always faced is dns propagation, creating your record and walking away and waiting (sometimes) hours for it to be recognized. Your method gives an ability to create a number of records in advance with different security restrictions so that’s nice, but requires a lot of thought and even more time adding records in your DNS.

So whats the actual verification process look like? You give the SP the subdomain generated and they query TXT records from there? how does the actual verification work here and when/how does the user receive an email?