7 ms·

This 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

This 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 ago
  Because 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 ago
    Why is it unreasonable? You are, after all, using the product those outlets provide.
    - sxates 9y ago
      Imagine if you had to buy a whole album every time you wanted to hear a song.
      - jasonkostempski 9y ago
        Before you ever get to hear the song.
      - vertex-four 9y ago
        You used to. People did. Now most people stream on Spotify for free, and the hardcore listeners buy albums, and practically nobody buys singles.
        sxates 9y ago
        We've always had free streaming in the form of radio.
        vertex-four 9y ago
        The point is that you didn't get to pick what you wanted to listen to. It's fundamentally different. If you liked a song enough to want to listen to it on demand, you had to buy the album.
        Aloha 9y ago
        That made sense with the distribution medium of the time - much as a newspaper subscription made sense for a dead-tree medium of distribution - we've not been there for a long time.
        vertex-four 9y ago
        Perhaps. Though you'd think there's been more than enough research to show that people don't buy individual articles. People don't even really buy individual movies any more, in my experience. Anyway, Blendle exists now, so we'll see in a couple of years whether this actually does become the standard way of reading the news. I somehow doubt it.
  - vertex-four 9y ago
    https://launch.blendle.com/ https://launch.blendle.com/ will quite happily do that for you. I suspect that it won't last.
  - com2kid 9y ago
    > while I'd quite happily pay maybe 10-20c per article to read. Blame the credit card companies for killing even the potential of true micro-transactions. I often wonder how different the internet would be if payments on the order of 10 cents were possible to make.
- bachmeier 9y ago
  > if the WSJ is consistently providing high quality content, why not pay for it? That's a different question. What value does HN provide if a story is behind a paywall? You end up with a bunch of discussion mostly by people that haven't read the story. In that case HN is nothing more than a forum for random discussion. If that's considered okay, HN won't be around for long...
DanBC 9y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15531085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15531085
- jasonkostempski 9y ago
  "We've been through this countless times, which is why it's in the FAQ. Paywalls suck, but HN would suck worse to do without NYT, WSJ, Economist, and New Yorker articles, to name a few. It's the lesser of two evils and it's off-topic to endlessly litigate this." I accidentally clicked the link on my phone and got nothing but frustration, I don't see how that makes HN better. The HN I usually see hasn't had those links in quite some time. I haven't missed them, even a little.
  - bachmeier 9y ago
    The FAQ says "It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds." This story, AFAICT, does not have a workaround. Edit: Yes, I did try the link posted elsewhere.

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 ago
Because 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 ago
  Why is it unreasonable? You are, after all, using the product those outlets provide.
  - sxates 9y ago
    Imagine if you had to buy a whole album every time you wanted to hear a song.
    - jasonkostempski 9y ago
      Before you ever get to hear the song.
    - vertex-four 9y ago
      You used to. People did. Now most people stream on Spotify for free, and the hardcore listeners buy albums, and practically nobody buys singles.
      - sxates 9y ago
        We've always had free streaming in the form of radio.
        vertex-four 9y ago
        The point is that you didn't get to pick what you wanted to listen to. It's fundamentally different. If you liked a song enough to want to listen to it on demand, you had to buy the album.
      - Aloha 9y ago
        That made sense with the distribution medium of the time - much as a newspaper subscription made sense for a dead-tree medium of distribution - we've not been there for a long time.
        vertex-four 9y ago
        Perhaps. Though you'd think there's been more than enough research to show that people don't buy individual articles. People don't even really buy individual movies any more, in my experience. Anyway, Blendle exists now, so we'll see in a couple of years whether this actually does become the standard way of reading the news. I somehow doubt it.
- vertex-four 9y ago
  https://launch.blendle.com/ https://launch.blendle.com/ will quite happily do that for you. I suspect that it won't last.
- com2kid 9y ago
  > while I'd quite happily pay maybe 10-20c per article to read. Blame the credit card companies for killing even the potential of true micro-transactions. I often wonder how different the internet would be if payments on the order of 10 cents were possible to make.
bachmeier 9y ago
> if the WSJ is consistently providing high quality content, why not pay for it? That's a different question. What value does HN provide if a story is behind a paywall? You end up with a bunch of discussion mostly by people that haven't read the story. In that case HN is nothing more than a forum for random discussion. If that's considered okay, HN won't be around for long...

DanBC 9y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15531085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15531085

jasonkostempski 9y ago
"We've been through this countless times, which is why it's in the FAQ. Paywalls suck, but HN would suck worse to do without NYT, WSJ, Economist, and New Yorker articles, to name a few. It's the lesser of two evils and it's off-topic to endlessly litigate this." I accidentally clicked the link on my phone and got nothing but frustration, I don't see how that makes HN better. The HN I usually see hasn't had those links in quite some time. I haven't missed them, even a little.
- bachmeier 9y ago
  The FAQ says "It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds." This story, AFAICT, does not have a workaround. Edit: Yes, I did try the link posted elsewhere.