3 ms·

Given the sheer volume of WSJ paywall links posted here, combined with the significance of YC, surely someone at YC could call someone at WSJ and get them to by

Given the sheer volume of WSJ paywall links posted here, combined with the significance of YC, surely someone at YC could call someone at WSJ and get them to bypass the paywall when the referrer is HN. This is getting ridiculous. I'm familiar with the "web" link but even that gets old when every 4th or 5th link goes to WSJ.

ruddct 10y ago
"Web". It's literally right next to the article link. Don't think biz-dev is needed here.
- downandout 10y ago
  It's "literally right next to the article link" after clicking over to the comments page, which I don't normally do at first. So the process is click on article -> get annoyed by paywall -> hit back button -> click comments page -> click web link -> click to article - for a significant percentage of the links on the front page. Not awesome. Perhaps the default link on all WSJ articles should be converted to the web link. That would solve the problem too. The volume is high enough that special treatment of these links is warranted.
vintageseltzer 10y ago
Not to be rude, but are you kidding? HN has provided you with a workaround, WSJ has provided you with free content, and that is not enough? How about signing up for the WSJ?
- coderdude 10y ago
  vintageseltzer, entitlement. Entitlement, vintageseltzer. Now that you've both met, welcome to "hacker culture."
- downandout 10y ago
  are you kidding? No. The volume of links to this one particular site with a very aggressive paywall has been increasing. Further, HN administrators actually change links pointing to alternative sites over to paywalled WSJ URLs when WSJ has the story (I know, because it happened with a story I submitted). WSJ has provided you with free content They're not ad supported? How about signing up for the WSJ? I might consider it, if they weren't so obnoxious with the paywall, along with inundating their pages with ads and completely blocking the loading of content when using an ad blocker. I will not reward that type of behavior, and neither should anyone else. I reported them to Google for cloaking a few weeks ago because under certain circumstances, the paywall comes up even when clicking over from Google (so, to your argument that "HN has provided [me] with a workaround" - that isn't always the case because they flagrantly violate Google's anti-cloaking policy under certain circumstances, on top of everything else).
  - coderdude 10y ago
    You're trolling, right? This is a parody or something. > I will not reward that type of behavior My mind is being blown. I'm completely feeding right now.
    - downandout 10y ago
      So everyone that doesn't share your opinion is trolling? No, I'm not. If you want to pay WSJ for that type of behavior, you're certainly welcome to.
      - coderdude 10y ago
        Do not object to the WSJ paywall. I will not allow it. I will not stand for this.
    - Trundle 10y ago
      Definitely stay away from the comments on any article specifically about ads/ad blocking/content site monetisation haha. This guy isn't alone.
      - coderdude 10y ago
        I just can't tell anymore. Everything I read is so bizarre that I'm convinced it's just people messing with us. I'm probably being too charitable.
        Trundle 10y ago
        As far as I can tell, some people believe everyone elses primary purpose should be to make their life better. The owners, writers, marketers, developers, and other stakeholders in the wsj shouldn't be thinking about providing for themselves, they should be nobly sacrificing their lives so that we have something amusing to read for a minute or so a couple times a week (for free of course). A few days ago I was talking to a guy in real life about pokemon go and he was both genuinely angry at the developers and also, unironically, called them entitled. I was flabbergasted. Entitled for making something and allowing this guy to use it, but him being genuinely angry at people he'd never met, nor had any dealings with, for not providing enough value was completely reasonable to him. All I know is that if I ever run a business or accidentally become a celebrity, I'm keeping an army of PR suits between me and the general public. Too many people indignant about too many things to attempt honest public discourse with my real name attached.
- econner 10y ago
  but, but, this is the internet where everything is free and the money comes from advertising

ruddct 10y ago

"Web". It's literally right next to the article link. Don't think biz-dev is needed here.

downandout 10y ago
It's "literally right next to the article link" after clicking over to the comments page, which I don't normally do at first. So the process is click on article -> get annoyed by paywall -> hit back button -> click comments page -> click web link -> click to article - for a significant percentage of the links on the front page. Not awesome. Perhaps the default link on all WSJ articles should be converted to the web link. That would solve the problem too. The volume is high enough that special treatment of these links is warranted.

vintageseltzer 10y ago

Not to be rude, but are you kidding? HN has provided you with a workaround, WSJ has provided you with free content, and that is not enough? How about signing up for the WSJ?

coderdude 10y ago
vintageseltzer, entitlement. Entitlement, vintageseltzer. Now that you've both met, welcome to "hacker culture."
downandout 10y ago
are you kidding? No. The volume of links to this one particular site with a very aggressive paywall has been increasing. Further, HN administrators actually change links pointing to alternative sites over to paywalled WSJ URLs when WSJ has the story (I know, because it happened with a story I submitted). WSJ has provided you with free content They're not ad supported? How about signing up for the WSJ? I might consider it, if they weren't so obnoxious with the paywall, along with inundating their pages with ads and completely blocking the loading of content when using an ad blocker. I will not reward that type of behavior, and neither should anyone else. I reported them to Google for cloaking a few weeks ago because under certain circumstances, the paywall comes up even when clicking over from Google (so, to your argument that "HN has provided [me] with a workaround" - that isn't always the case because they flagrantly violate Google's anti-cloaking policy under certain circumstances, on top of everything else).
- coderdude 10y ago
  You're trolling, right? This is a parody or something. > I will not reward that type of behavior My mind is being blown. I'm completely feeding right now.
  - downandout 10y ago
    So everyone that doesn't share your opinion is trolling? No, I'm not. If you want to pay WSJ for that type of behavior, you're certainly welcome to.
    - coderdude 10y ago
      Do not object to the WSJ paywall. I will not allow it. I will not stand for this.
  - Trundle 10y ago
    Definitely stay away from the comments on any article specifically about ads/ad blocking/content site monetisation haha. This guy isn't alone.
    - coderdude 10y ago
      I just can't tell anymore. Everything I read is so bizarre that I'm convinced it's just people messing with us. I'm probably being too charitable.
      - Trundle 10y ago
        As far as I can tell, some people believe everyone elses primary purpose should be to make their life better. The owners, writers, marketers, developers, and other stakeholders in the wsj shouldn't be thinking about providing for themselves, they should be nobly sacrificing their lives so that we have something amusing to read for a minute or so a couple times a week (for free of course). A few days ago I was talking to a guy in real life about pokemon go and he was both genuinely angry at the developers and also, unironically, called them entitled. I was flabbergasted. Entitled for making something and allowing this guy to use it, but him being genuinely angry at people he'd never met, nor had any dealings with, for not providing enough value was completely reasonable to him. All I know is that if I ever run a business or accidentally become a celebrity, I'm keeping an army of PR suits between me and the general public. Too many people indignant about too many things to attempt honest public discourse with my real name attached.
econner 10y ago
but, but, this is the internet where everything is free and the money comes from advertising