6 ms·
for some reason the usual bypass of wsj is not working, can someone assist? I tried the ole paste link into google trick.
by ajr0 9y ago
for some reason the usual bypass of wsj is not working, can someone assist?
I tried the ole paste link into google trick.
- lightbyte 9y agoFacebook referral trick works. Create a bookmark with: javascript:location.href='http://facebook.com/l.php?u='+encodeURIComponent(location.href) http://facebook.com/l.php?u='+encodeURIComponent(location.hr... And click it when on the article page.
- amelius 9y agoThanks. You can also go to the page, open console, and run this at the JS commandline: location.href='http://facebook.com/l.php?u='+encodeURIComponent(location.href)
- swypych 9y agoThats very cool, why does this work?
- jimktrains2 9y agoThe JS console has the same scope as JS running on the page. (as does javascript: URis).
- semiquaver 9y agoWSJ (along with most news organizations that have paywalls) values clicks from social media highly enough to exempt them from the paywall. Another technique to bypass most paywalls is searching twitter for an article's title.
- swypych 9y agoInteresting, thanks
- ajr0 9y agothank you, unfortunately I block 100% of all facebook network requests on my wireless network by URLs and subnets. with this news I may consider opening a hole... but unlikely.
- zulln 9y agoJust set the referrer to Facebook on all requests to WSJ then? You seem to be up to funny network configurations.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- shoota 9y agohttps://searchengineland.com/report-google-ending-first-click-free-help-publishers-boost-subscriptions-282492 https://searchengineland.com/report-google-ending-first-clic... Google is ending requiring news publishers from showing content that would otherwise be behind a paywall for free.
- ajr0 9y agothanks I missed this notification.
- jasonkostempski 9y agoThis is exactly why I've blocked all wsj links in my browser, unfortunately, the add on I use doesn't work on mobile Firefox yet. Can't HN just ban these? It's clear they don't want nonpaying users, we should respect that wish.
- com2kid 9y ago> Can't HN just ban these? If we are going to decry the loss of quality journalism due to the loss of funds to pay for newsrooms, shouldn't we be supportive of those outlets who are unafraid to ask for quality? To make an analogy, people here are free to do Show HN's with commercial products. Apps don't have to be free (and comments often complain about free apps that don't value users!) In other words, if the WSJ is consistently providing high quality content, why not pay for it?
- revmoo 9y ago> shouldn't we be supportive of those outlets who are unafraid to ask for quality? That's fine on some other site, but I'd rather have quality homegrown content. > people here are free to do Show HN's with commercial products . I wish they wouldn't
- Aloha 9y agoBecause I also read the Washington Post, NY Times, LA Times, Seattle Times, USA Today, Christian Science Monitor, and others - its unreasonably for me to have to get a subscription to each, while I'd quite happily pay maybe 10-20c per article to read.
- techsupporter 9y agoWhy is it unreasonable? You are, after all, using the product those outlets provide.
- sxates 9y agoImagine if you had to buy a whole album every time you wanted to hear a song.
- eplanit 9y agoOutline works great for this: http://outline.com/khAmVX http://outline.com/khAmVX