Берегись этого чай. There, fixed it.

Bit surprised that I'm not as affected by this news as I should be. Maybe it's because I've heard related news mentioned on the radio before reading it online. (Speaking of broadcasts, tenuous link between these, perhaps, but I don't mind making the association if it points out a slippery slope.) At this point, considering the other news in tech, this breach is about as startling as the news from space earlier in the year. (Plague - scream! Contagion - hoarse scream! Murder hornets - pant, wheeze... UFOs - sod this, I'm out of scream.)

I'm only slightly more curious as to why one person was chosen for a government post over another - whether it was entirely because one candidate was less suitable (no plums for cannibals, it seems) or because the candidate was willing to call half of those potential constituents a name by proxy (then again, forget the proxy). Having more context shows just how out of proportion this situation actually is, and I think I can understand why no apology should be expected, but let me see if I've got this right about double negatives - if you're not saying they're not something, you are saying they are.

Seen this sort of thing before - my, isn't that contagious, Dorian. A shiny new point for the list of reasons to vote elsewhere? Don't mind if I do.

Keeping handy here (ouch) a pile of news to 看. (Still there, 微软, but since you lot are busy...)