My understanding is that LPL is not still practicing (he says he's retired, to focus on security work), but I'd guess he knows someone, if McNally didn't already have his own lawyer.
I mean, it's not exactly a secret. If you really want to know you can look it up online. He even has a whole talk he gives about why he generally doesn't reveal his identity. People send him packages with trackers hidden in them, hire private investigators to follow him with bogus stories, etc.
This approach (using a separate domain for content that isn't part of their service itself) has security advantages-- for example, this way a compromise of their news site CMS can't expose users' PayPal session tokens.
It's decently common for websites to do this-- this is the same reason why Github Pages is hosted at github.io rather than github.com, and why static blobs are at githubusercontent.com. Those have a somewhat different threat model than PayPal's news site (hopefully PayPal isn't letting any random person add news stories...), but the premise is the same: if the thing does not need authentication tokens for the main service, make it so that it's impossible for it to get them.
(You could get some of the same effect by scoping your cookies to a specific subdomain rather than allowing them to apply to all subdomains, but (1) that's not always how you want to structure your site, and (2) it's really easy to mess up and inadvertently scope a cookie too broadly (or for the browser to misbehave and send to subdomains anyways, which was the default behavior of one very prominent browser for a really long time). Using a different domain entirely sidesteps all of this completely.)
Maybe I'm missing something but you can't separate you're session and authentication with a different subdomain? Eg. My session on corp.paypal.com would be locked down to solely corp.paypal.com.
From a practical sense, what different does a subdomain and a dedicated domain offer if you're managing your certs correctly?
You can, but a lot of people lack the discipline to do so correctly. I'd prefer them to use corp.paypal.com, but as a security guy it's easier to just get them a separate domain and let them have their less-secured stuff completely isolated.
You can, but is difficult and prone to errors. Separate domains solve the root cause of the issue. The alternative is an entry on the public suffix list.
From my point of view, a possible compromise of their news site CMS sees like a much less serious threat than phishing, so this seems like a bad tradeoff. If you're worried that cookie scoping will get broken, maybe you could have the news site CMS raise an alert if it sees PayPal-session-token cookie names.
Because the game already also runs on Xbox and, given MS's recent gaming strategy (which is putting less emphasis on Xbox exclusives), could conceivably come to Playstation or maybe even Switch 2 in the future.
On the Windows side of things, there's also a push towards ARM hardware (with current Snapdragon-based hardware actually performing pretty well). Not sure if Flight Simulator is currently ARM-native, but having the ability to go ARM-native is probably desirable at least as a long-term goal.
Scrolls written in a single column and "scrolled" vertically (like a modern text editor or web browser) weren't completely unheard of, particularly for liturgical or legal documents. See http://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/viewFile/9191/4607
But, yeah, the horizontal format would've been more common.
Duh, also true on my Mac Mini. But yeah, “modern Mac laptops” probably makes the statement correct enough and still describes the entire set of targets.
Soarin’ (in California and Florida, at least) originally used IMAX film projectors and OMNIMAX-style dome screens; it was updated to digital at around the same time as the ride film changed to the current “Soarin’ around the World” in 2016 (plus or minus a year; I think the digital conversion might’ve been a bit earlier in California)
