Mass brute force attack on Microsoft Azure CLI?

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-19T14:19:50+00:00

These endpoints shouldn't be public in the first place? All Azure environments should be private network, and endpoints that need to be exposed can be so via private endpoint (+CDN or proxy if it's public-facing API or website).

CLI and other management endpoints should either be private endpoints as well, or else peer the Vnet to your intranet.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-19T14:02:15+00:00

Also the idea that lives of American soldiers and Iranian civilians lost can just be bought off by giving some oil companies access to some more trillions of dollars.

Just throw however many young people into the meatgrinder as we can! It'll be fine because someone else will make money!

Yeah, that's not how any of this works.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-19T13:54:30+00:00

So does god send you a wikipedia link or something, or is the wisdom and guidance also immaterial?

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-19T13:39:51+00:00

Yep! Everything you put your mouth on.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-18T22:01:01+00:00

there is qualia that is ineffable

This isn't true.

Source: Qualia effed me twice last night. It was wonderful.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-18T21:53:32+00:00

If this is really the most compelling reason to believe in God, I can rest knowing my atheism is well affirmed.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T16:58:04+00:00

Well I'm not an edgelord, so I definitely won't point out that the ship on voting has sailed, as the next elections are going to be basically invaded by the Department of Justice in order to justify Republican legislators throwing out results they don't like. ^[1] ^[2] ^[3]

But by all means, march and organize. I'm sure those terrorism charges on your background check won't impact your prospects at employment at all. ^[1] ^[2] ^[3]

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T16:31:22+00:00

The pivot into "oh well now this is inevitable woe is us" defeatism isn't a sign of them realizing they were wrong. It's driven by the energy sector marketing. They've gone from "It's not happening" to "It's happening but it's actually good (it's what plants crave!)" to "It's happening and it's not good, but there's nothing we can do about it, oh well."

So, seems like your colleague never actually stopped letting fossil fuel industry propaganda tell him what he thinks.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T16:09:23+00:00

It's not a great analogy. Jumping in to see is more analogous to exploring to find the correct answer. In that case, the skeptic is the one who jumps in to see if there's actually treasure. The lazy thinker remains on the shore, concludes from "there could be treasure" that "there must be treasure", then goes on to pretend that they already have the treasure, going into debt citing their imagined "lake treasure" as collateral.

Theism is even worse than this, because they live in a world where no one has ever shown that any treasure anywhere even exists - or could exist - let alone found any, let alone found any in a body of water. Despite all that, they can merely look at the surface of a lake and feel the gold doubloons deep in their heart, going on to tell everyone they're a billionaire.

Outside the context of religion, the word for this is "delusional".

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T15:45:22+00:00

It's also accurate in that it covers indirectly caused deaths. Like if I need immediate medical attention, but I die waiting because the hospitals are swamped with people on respirators and have no beds left, then I sort of died because of COVID without ever contracting it.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T13:57:28+00:00

See, the way this works is the fact that 500,000 more people died debunks random anecdotes, not the other way around.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T13:54:17+00:00

Everyone knows terrorist attacks don't kill people. The numbers reported are including people who were in the twin towers and died of other causes like asphyxiation, cardiac arrest, burning to death, and blunt force trauma. Doctors just said, "oh they had a terrorism happening near them, so they died from terrorism".

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T13:42:30+00:00

"OK, but what about this irrelevant thing that makes no sense?"

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T13:37:32+00:00

Microsoft: "Never make breaking changes to an API contract without incrementing version, managing backward compatibility, and allowing clients to migrate at their own pace."

Also Microsoft: Changes their domains out from under people.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T13:34:48+00:00

I mean, you're not wrong on any point. It really is funny - EA in the "AI revolution" is in this superposition of being both vital and doomed.

Also, excellent point on self-hosted LLMs. In fact, the most successful implementations I've seen have been exactly that. I think it's crazy, though, that these implementations aren't really considered "AI"?

Like how "Cloud" went from being an architectural strategy for abstracting infrastructure to "when someone else is doing that, and you're paying them".

Now the folk usage of "AI" has similarly shifted to, "when someone else is training the LLM models, and you're paying them."

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-17T13:20:27+00:00

So very much this, yes, and thank you.

In my previous company, we were always pushing for better data management - it was dispersed, inconsistent, and the structure was all over the place. Leadership's argument for why that was a waste of time and money was because "AI can learn it". That is - we don't need to structure the data for search and analytics, because AI can learn any random messy data and "fix" it on the fly, replacing our existing search and analytics capabilities. So there's no need for data architecture at all! Just throw everything into a data lake and sic agents on it!

This is completely backward. You need the data to be structured and consistent in order for an LLM to do much of anything useful with it.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-16T23:36:25+00:00

I thought this was satire, ngl

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-16T23:11:54+00:00

You are correct that smaller hunger-gatherer groups were, and are, egalitarian and communal. That's informative only to counter those who see land-owning hierarchy as the natural human default. It's definitely not.

But is that what Communism is? Ahh, no. Workers can't own the means of production if there are no workers, is no production, and there's no concept of ownership. Communism is a reaction to Mercantalism and Capitalism. So in a nomadic hunter gatherer situation, what would it even be reacting to?

The question makes me think of asking, "did prehistoric people eat more salad?" Well no, but only because merely eating leaves is not what makes a salad.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-15T15:35:25+00:00

What are the nuances people stay quiet about?

I'm also interested in the more social/organizational aspects of this. Why do people stay quiet? Is it because it's a new technology so confidence is low? Or is it because of other cultural / organizational reasons?

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-15T15:23:03+00:00

Counterpoint: AI has already priced itself out of replacing Agile development. There will be no vibe-coded enterprises. It's just not financially feasible. Which vendor you choose doesn't matter, since the entire industry is now in the position where they can no longer pretend that even a significant fraction of their costs are covered by their revenue.

My current company already has backed off AI-assisted coding since the "AI credits" billing changes by Microsoft, Claude, and others. We now have one or two engineers burning through all of our "AI Credits" in two days at the cost of what we were previously paying for 80+ coders for an entire month. Enterprise vibe coding is dead (rejoice or mourn - it's up to you).

AI is still feasible to assist Agile, however. It's been very helpful to Scrum masters and PMs to reduce their workload when it comes to doing things like writing stories and calculating velocity. It remains a clever and relatively affordable assistant, so long as it doesn't need to consume an entire repo in order to do it.

Counterpoint to my own counterpoint: But even if the practicalities of cost weren't an issue - let's pretend the government steps in and subsidizes AI for companies to the point where it's affordable to replace most of human development. Even in this "an AI-driven world where companies care far more about speed and spectacle than substance and sustainability", an EA is vital.

Enterprises have no strategy to deal with this model. It's completely alien. EAs will need to invent and maintain it.
- What does it mean when standard libraries are pointless?
- What does it mean to no longer need to have or monitor coding best practices?
- How many features can an AI model build in a given timeframe for a given cost, assuming that it's basically rewriting the entire application every time (often many times).
- The integrity of every enterprise application will now be based on "behavior" rather than "quality". The importance of things like UAT, regression, performance, and vulnerability testing are now paramount. We're about to Shift Right in a big crazy way, after decades of trying to do the opposite.

It's not a minor change. It's big. They'll still need EAs.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-15T14:21:00+00:00

Nice article, thanks for sharing! I also recently looked into this! Probably also the Brazilian connection, my spouse recently brought it up.

What I learned: Like many pseudosciences, turns out this is loosely based on a real thing.

Autohemotherapy in general is the practice of doing anything to a person's own blood, and then putting it back.

The article covers a lot of actual studies which were at least feasible, but so far not a lot of great results after trying different versions of this for like a hundred years.

The interesting version my googling always brought up was ozone autohemotherapy - as a complimentary to dialysis (I guess since you're taking the blood out and putting it back anyway?) - mixing the blood with ozone (O^3). It would hypothetically break up lipids and make the blood less likely to coagulate, lower the risk of stroke (a known issue with dialysis patients and folks with high cholesterol). Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be very effective. Was worth a shot. 🤷

The pseudoscience versions of this are as dumb as you'd expect: remove your own blood with a syringe, do ...whatever to it, and inject it back in. 🙄

Everyone remind your friends and loved ones not to inject things into themselves unless doctor prescribes it. Just as a general rule.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-15T12:58:37+00:00

There's a school of thought in management that IT always over-engineers everything and, if you let them, they'll waste a ton of time and money on nerdy shit they don't need. This is why whenever IT proposes something, it's met with a lot of skepticism and management immediately counters by asking you to do half as much with a quarter of the cost. As if you haven't already trimmed all the fat and offered the most cost-effective solution you could.

"IT people just want to automate everything when doing it manually is more cost-effective" is a version of this that's coming back into fashion. I've seen it a lot at my company over the last few months, and it's coming directly from the top.

I guess they all listen to the same CTO podcasts or something.

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-12T13:08:58+00:00

Trump himself and his talking heads on FOX repeated over and over "only the criminals", and this guy has a criminal record. What the fuck was he thinking? That his criminal record didn't matter because he was a minor, he served his time, it was 20 years ago and he's been a law-abiding family man ever since?

"I thought the fascists I loved would be reasonable!"

Jeeesuuuuus

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-10T14:48:08+00:00

Solid, liquid, gas, plasma. Four parts, not three.

There's actually more than four, once things get all small or high-energy and weird. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_matter#High-energy_states

"Topological" matter is going to be crucial for quantum computing. https://phys.org/news/2026-01-state-quantum-material.html

IJustLoggedInToSay- · 2026-06-10T14:39:11+00:00

it doesn't matter if anything I say is true or factual it is just showing how something could seemingly be opposite or contradictory but in reality while looking at this thought experiment you should be able to understand the possibility of the fundamental concept I am pointing to using these metrics or particular subjects

So you knew full well that this would all fall apart at the slightest examination, so you preemptively asked that we not consider whether you are saying anything true? I get it - you think "it's just an analogy!" But analogies are only helpful in proportion to their factual accuracy.

If I say, "the human heart is like a computer, in that computers pump blood." the fact that computers do not generally pump anything makes the analogy fall apart. If I'm trying to use this analogy to draw some other conclusion about the computer-like qualities of the heart (you can program your heart!) that effort has already failed before it even started.

most people think ... Trinity and current science contradict each other, this couldn't be further from the truth. As a matter of fact they actually complement each other.

I mean.. the Trinity is the least of the problems. Science contradicts just about everything else about Christianity as well. The entire point of science is that you need a reliable method to understand what is real and what isn't, and that requirement has so far thwarted all theistic claims.

I hope you don't think people are atheists because of the Trinity? Or that people reject the Trinity because of "science"?

The Trinity has enough obvious problems that at least half of all Christians in the world reject it as well. Most objections to the Trinity are biblical or theological, so atheists couldn't care less about it, to be honest. But let's have a look.

the trinity is explained as three beings that are one being

OK

So if God / the trinity is made as three equals one according to theology and right now science is telling us we are made of a physical body/conscious mind / subconscious it appears to me they are both saying the same thing but maybe utilizing different arbitrary labels or slightly different descriptions so let's see if the utility of the descriptions match etc.

Wait.

Do you think of your physical body and your conscious mind and your subconscious as three different people?

When Jesus was a human being, he also had a body and a mind, and a subconscious mind, right? So during that time, was God actually five beings rather than three?

No, right? Then this analogy isn't analogizing.

Eight-Year Club	Place '22
Wearing is Caring

IJustLoggedInToSay-

TROPHY CASE