5 ms·

Meta: Looks like WSJ is smart enough now to detect the `web` links. I went directly to the site, hit paywall, backed out. Then went via the `web` link, same p

Meta: Looks like WSJ is smart enough now to detect the `web` links. I went directly to the site, hit paywall, backed out. Then went via the `web` link, same paywall. Went to `web` link in incognito, was able to read the (fairly anemic) article.

azhenley 10y ago
Interesting, the web link worked for me.
figers 10y ago
it's hit or miss, but I rarely have to do incognito for WSJ
- eric_h 10y ago
  I think they cookie you on the direct link hit, so going back and doing the web link doesn't work without incognito (IME).
  - tmm 10y ago
    I get the paywall, even in incognito across all browsers. They must also be tracking by IP.
    - eric_h 10y ago
      Fascinating. I work at a large WeWork (hundreds of people, ~9 floors of a 12 story building in manhattan). I wonder if I'm silently benefitting from WSJ subscribers who work out of there causing our ips to be whitelisted for uncookied, google-referred views. Do you do most of your browsing from home?
eric_h 10y ago
Yeah, I've had to do incognito on the WSJ web links for a while now.
mjevans 10y ago
I would prefer an HN 'rule' that denies the listing of any articles that originate from paywall sites.
- the_watcher 10y ago
  So a rule that denies listing articles from publications that regularly produce interesting stuff? That's the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
  - brianwawok 10y ago
    This same article is on 20 sites. No reason to pay wall it.
    - the_watcher 10y ago
      In this case, fair point. Not all pay walled articles meet this criteria. Many do not.
funkyy 10y ago
Seems like a cookie they set for your browser. Normal practice.
tylercubell 10y ago
Try the "Paywall Bypass" Chrome extension.
whatislife2 10y ago
Try this Chrome Extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bypass-wsj-other-sites/gfbabigadapckiaabchaolgjfbgickop https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bypass-wsj-other-s...

azhenley 10y ago

Interesting, the web link worked for me.

figers 10y ago

it's hit or miss, but I rarely have to do incognito for WSJ

eric_h 10y ago
I think they cookie you on the direct link hit, so going back and doing the web link doesn't work without incognito (IME).
- tmm 10y ago
  I get the paywall, even in incognito across all browsers. They must also be tracking by IP.
  - eric_h 10y ago
    Fascinating. I work at a large WeWork (hundreds of people, ~9 floors of a 12 story building in manhattan). I wonder if I'm silently benefitting from WSJ subscribers who work out of there causing our ips to be whitelisted for uncookied, google-referred views. Do you do most of your browsing from home?

eric_h 10y ago

Yeah, I've had to do incognito on the WSJ web links for a while now.

mjevans 10y ago

I would prefer an HN 'rule' that denies the listing of any articles that originate from paywall sites.

the_watcher 10y ago
So a rule that denies listing articles from publications that regularly produce interesting stuff? That's the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
- brianwawok 10y ago
  This same article is on 20 sites. No reason to pay wall it.
  - the_watcher 10y ago
    In this case, fair point. Not all pay walled articles meet this criteria. Many do not.

funkyy 10y ago

Seems like a cookie they set for your browser. Normal practice.

tylercubell 10y ago

Try the "Paywall Bypass" Chrome extension.

whatislife2 10y ago

Try this Chrome Extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bypass-wsj-other-sites/gfbabigadapckiaabchaolgjfbgickop https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bypass-wsj-other-s...