5 ms·

So why isn't this on the Chrome store?

JamieF1 9y ago
Because the sites that have set up the paywall will report the extension and get it taken down, happened to an extension that I made a while back that had a similar idea.
- personjerry 9y ago
  Why is it take-down-able?
  - kahnpro 9y ago
    Because it allows people to circumvent the paywall and WSJ will complain to Google. And then because Google can take down whatever they want...
    - chii 9y ago
      Which is why you don't put your extension as s Chrome extension, but as a tamper monkey script.
      - _e 9y ago
        What is the best, in your opinion, site to find tamper/grease monkey scripts? I remember the landscape being fragmented some time ago.
        skinnymuch 9y ago
        Yeah. Seems like when the main site went down, the scene never got things back on track with a proper aggregator or central site.
        crtasm 9y ago
        https://greasyfork.org/ https://greasyfork.org/ - it's been a year or so since I've made use of it but after userscripts.org became unusable this was my replacement. they made some sensible decisions about what's acceptable in a script and whitelisted external libraries: https://greasyfork.org/en/help/code-rules https://greasyfork.org/en/help/code-rules
    - donohoe 9y ago
      Not really. There are lots of extensions that do this: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/search/paywall%20remover?_category=extensions https://chrome.google.com/webstore/search/paywall%20remover?... I'm sure many get taken down by request but its usually on a technicality (flimsy trademark claim) or sloppy assessment on Google's part.
igravious 9y ago
A Paywall Extension, hmmm? What if it were part of a dev tool bundle? It's arguably unfair that users of Facebook and Twitter and other social media sites should have access to more content than someone who has decided not to use those platforms.
- gms7777 9y ago
  Private websites have no duty to allow "fair access" to their content. Non-users of Facebook is not a legally protected class.
- Aryanna545 9y ago
  on sunday I got a brand new Saab 99 Turbo after having made $8551 this past four weeks and just over ten-k last month . it's by-far the most comfortable job I have ever had . I started this five months/ago and almost straight away began to bring home over $75... per-hour . CHEK FREELY .... MAKE FREELY:..... ___http://www.fl-y.com/3pbr http://www.fl-y.com/3pbr

Because the sites that have set up the paywall will report the extension and get it taken down, happened to an extension that I made a while back that had a similar idea.

personjerry 9y ago
Why is it take-down-able?
- kahnpro 9y ago
  Because it allows people to circumvent the paywall and WSJ will complain to Google. And then because Google can take down whatever they want...
  - chii 9y ago
    Which is why you don't put your extension as s Chrome extension, but as a tamper monkey script.
    - _e 9y ago
      What is the best, in your opinion, site to find tamper/grease monkey scripts? I remember the landscape being fragmented some time ago.
      - skinnymuch 9y ago
        Yeah. Seems like when the main site went down, the scene never got things back on track with a proper aggregator or central site.
      - crtasm 9y ago
        https://greasyfork.org/ https://greasyfork.org/ - it's been a year or so since I've made use of it but after userscripts.org became unusable this was my replacement. they made some sensible decisions about what's acceptable in a script and whitelisted external libraries: https://greasyfork.org/en/help/code-rules https://greasyfork.org/en/help/code-rules
  - donohoe 9y ago
    Not really. There are lots of extensions that do this: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/search/paywall%20remover?_category=extensions https://chrome.google.com/webstore/search/paywall%20remover?... I'm sure many get taken down by request but its usually on a technicality (flimsy trademark claim) or sloppy assessment on Google's part.

igravious 9y ago

A Paywall Extension, hmmm? What if it were part of a dev tool bundle? It's arguably unfair that users of Facebook and Twitter and other social media sites should have access to more content than someone who has decided not to use those platforms.

gms7777 9y ago
Private websites have no duty to allow "fair access" to their content. Non-users of Facebook is not a legally protected class.
Aryanna545 9y ago
on sunday I got a brand new Saab 99 Turbo after having made $8551 this past four weeks and just over ten-k last month . it's by-far the most comfortable job I have ever had . I started this five months/ago and almost straight away began to bring home over $75... per-hour . CHEK FREELY .... MAKE FREELY:..... ___http://www.fl-y.com/3pbr http://www.fl-y.com/3pbr