I love seeing this pop up again. Our customer support team has been steadily moving all of our docs over to Diátaxis for a while and it's been a really nice improvement.

Devs don't do it because we are a lazy bunch, which is the same reason we like using LLMs so much, because it taps into our laziness.

Nah, I think this falls squarely in the ideal space for devs: we want to be even lazier, so we build tools to allow that. Yak shaving is the premier lifestyle for devs. Some get so into it that they stop programming, move to the hills, and raise yaks so they can shave them.

As evidence, I point to the massive number of mostly-LLM-generated LLM-sandboxing projects. Practically every day, I see a new 100k+ LoC project to make agentic coding safe, with shiny emoji-and-badge-encrusted readmes...

... and no issues, no forks, and usually no new commits after the first two weeks. Try to use one and you'll quickly see they're all extremely bug-ridden (one of the few constants with LLM code). And some have stood the test of time and have ten thousand issues that are mostly regressions that were once fixed but come back every other week. But they keep popping up rapidly!

Beyond the stated changes the author believes are necessary for citizens to make: stop externalizing responsibility, stop going along with social norms that perpetuate surveillance capitalism, and indulging in anger as a substitue for action; the other actionable takeaway to me is: "Unless we have real representation in our government. Companies don’t have vested interest in protecting privacy."

I interpret this as meaning citizens need to support advocacy groups that lobby elected officials to create/improve regulations that would limit the ability to implement surveillance capitalism. This aligns with the author's own words: "Responding to National or Regional calls for safety: Calls to support initiatives, or bills to increase security at the expense of freedom, make us less safe. Trading security for freedom reduces our ability to act."

Interesting, this is the first time I've seen this project. One thing I saw that concerns me a bit is that they provide command-line options for passing your user credentials and multi-factor code. I'm not a fan of giving anything that level of access when a resource-specific access token will do, but that's me.

Our current level of granularity allows you to give read or write access to a specific zone, but it does not go down to the level of giving read or write access to a specific RRset type yet, if that's what you're looking for.

Yeah, specific RRset

I've put a comment on the parent thread, but unless I've misunderstood what the poster said, we addressed the limitation back in 2023 with scoped access tokens.

> DNSimple seemed nice but IIRC I couldn't get a different API token per zone (?).

We overhauled our account tokens a few years back: https://blog.dnsimple.com/2023/11/scoped-access-tokens/ . With account tokens you can specify fine-grained scoped access control, including specifying only one or more zones that a token has read or read/write access to.

Thanks for recommending us, I (and the rest of the team) appreciate it.

At one point we were using Cloudflare's DNS Firewall product for our entire edge network. We have since moved half of our edge network to our own infrastructure and are currently in the process of expanding our edge network further, so at this point an outage at Cloudflare should be at least partially mitigated for our customers due to our separate edge network, and eventually it should be completely independent.

Sorry to hear that you're considering leaving. Is there a specific part of our pricing that you consider expensive? From the DNS side we've aligned pricing with what AWS, Google, and MSFT are charging, and for domains we've tried to stay competitive as well without completing removing our margins. Do you use specific features that are not available on our base plan?