5 ms·

Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our

Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism.

MatthewWilkes 8y ago
This article should be switched to an alternative that doesn't have restrictive geofilters or removed.
- esotericn 8y ago
  Agree. It's becoming rather farcical that I may have to use Tor to browse from ... a European IP.
- dionidium 8y ago
  There's an assumption in this statement that doesn't survive scrutiny. This is original reporting. What makes you think there's an equivalent alternative? † † This perception is obviously a huge problem for papers like the L.A. Times (and for writers, in general). For better or worse, this is how people see it, now. If you don't like the source, then you just imagine substituting in another one, like you're buying pork futures (or whatever the opposite of original reporting is).
  - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
    The assumption may be that any worthwhile article will immediately be "reported on" (restated with no new information) by a dozen other sites. Edit: I'm not saying that's a good thing, guys. I agree with dionidium.
    - gowld 8y ago
      "rereported"
    - dionidium 8y ago
      Right, exactly, which is to trivialize original reporting beyond the dictates of fairness. An original piece of reporting and the blog post that summarizes it are not equivalent content.
      - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
        Indeed. Just to be clear, I agree with you; I only meant to clearly state the OP's faulty assumption.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - esotericn 8y ago
    The equivalent alternative for European browsers is this: " " I suspect we're more than 25% of HN's audience. (Realistically, a mirror is the realistic alternative. Two have been posted and downvoted into oblivion. So it seems the HN community along with the LA Times support censorship. Nice.).
- excalibur 8y ago
  > or removed If two draconian policies don't add up to a level playing field, why not go for the hat trick!
- reaperducer 8y ago
  This article should be switched to an alternative It's an LA Times article written by an LA Times reporter published in the LA Times for the benefit of LA Times readers. What European alternative do you suggest?
  - MatthewWilkes 8y ago
    Deletion then. I'm not suggesting a European alternative, I'm saying that this does not belong on hackernews. Asto it being original reporting, that's a little hard for people to factor in when it's entirely blocked.
- gowld 8y ago
  It's an article about a domestic US issue.
danaos 8y ago
I wonder what percentage of HN readership is based in the EU.
- dang 8y ago
  Roughly a third.
_salmon 8y ago
Mirror: https://web.archive.org/web/20181030190026/http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-spectrum-cable-rate-hike-20181030-story.html https://web.archive.org/web/20181030190026/http://www.latime...
blfr 8y ago
How much does journalism cost? Americans would prefer Europeans didn't ask.
gamblor956 8y ago
EU citizens are discovering what GDPR exposure means for US companies that don't get significant revenue from EU customers: they simply start blocking the EU instead of complying. Because there's no way any company can actually comply with the GPDR; many of the rules conflict with each other. GDPR is a regulatory trap intended to allow the authorities to initiate selective enforcement against non-EU companies.
- baq 8y ago
  if those companies can't be sure that their customer privacy isn't up to some standard that half the world thinks can be adhered to, i'd say good riddance.
- teekert 8y ago
  And so it starts, the internet didn't just split along the China/rest-of-the-world axis but also along the US/Europe axis.
- garblegarble 8y ago
  >Because there's no way any company can actually comply with the GPDR; many of the rules conflict with each other. GDPR is a regulatory trap intended to allow the authorities to initiate selective enforcement against non-EU companies. Source, please? My reading of the GDPR is as a broad set of sensible rules requiring that you acquire consent for gathering and using people's data (and that consent can be revoked -- or withheld for non-core functionality). The law isn't machine code, it's a document interpreted by humans against the spirit of the law: act in good faith and respect people's privacy and you'll be fine. When I see a company that doesn't even want to consider doing business with a European because GDPR, I see a company that I want as far away from my personal data as possible.
neonate 8y ago
http://archive.is/nbuUq http://archive.is/nbuUq

MatthewWilkes 8y ago

This article should be switched to an alternative that doesn't have restrictive geofilters or removed.

esotericn 8y ago
Agree. It's becoming rather farcical that I may have to use Tor to browse from ... a European IP.
dionidium 8y ago
There's an assumption in this statement that doesn't survive scrutiny. This is original reporting. What makes you think there's an equivalent alternative? † † This perception is obviously a huge problem for papers like the L.A. Times (and for writers, in general). For better or worse, this is how people see it, now. If you don't like the source, then you just imagine substituting in another one, like you're buying pork futures (or whatever the opposite of original reporting is).
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  The assumption may be that any worthwhile article will immediately be "reported on" (restated with no new information) by a dozen other sites. Edit: I'm not saying that's a good thing, guys. I agree with dionidium.
  - gowld 8y ago
    "rereported"
  - dionidium 8y ago
    Right, exactly, which is to trivialize original reporting beyond the dictates of fairness. An original piece of reporting and the blog post that summarizes it are not equivalent content.
    - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
      Indeed. Just to be clear, I agree with you; I only meant to clearly state the OP's faulty assumption.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- esotericn 8y ago
  The equivalent alternative for European browsers is this: " " I suspect we're more than 25% of HN's audience. (Realistically, a mirror is the realistic alternative. Two have been posted and downvoted into oblivion. So it seems the HN community along with the LA Times support censorship. Nice.).
excalibur 8y ago
> or removed If two draconian policies don't add up to a level playing field, why not go for the hat trick!
reaperducer 8y ago
This article should be switched to an alternative It's an LA Times article written by an LA Times reporter published in the LA Times for the benefit of LA Times readers. What European alternative do you suggest?
- MatthewWilkes 8y ago
  Deletion then. I'm not suggesting a European alternative, I'm saying that this does not belong on hackernews. Asto it being original reporting, that's a little hard for people to factor in when it's entirely blocked.
gowld 8y ago
It's an article about a domestic US issue.

danaos 8y ago

I wonder what percentage of HN readership is based in the EU.

dang 8y ago
Roughly a third.

_salmon 8y ago

Mirror: https://web.archive.org/web/20181030190026/http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-spectrum-cable-rate-hike-20181030-story.html https://web.archive.org/web/20181030190026/http://www.latime...

blfr 8y ago

How much does journalism cost? Americans would prefer Europeans didn't ask.

gamblor956 8y ago

EU citizens are discovering what GDPR exposure means for US companies that don't get significant revenue from EU customers: they simply start blocking the EU instead of complying. Because there's no way any company can actually comply with the GPDR; many of the rules conflict with each other. GDPR is a regulatory trap intended to allow the authorities to initiate selective enforcement against non-EU companies.

baq 8y ago
if those companies can't be sure that their customer privacy isn't up to some standard that half the world thinks can be adhered to, i'd say good riddance.
teekert 8y ago
And so it starts, the internet didn't just split along the China/rest-of-the-world axis but also along the US/Europe axis.
garblegarble 8y ago
>Because there's no way any company can actually comply with the GPDR; many of the rules conflict with each other. GDPR is a regulatory trap intended to allow the authorities to initiate selective enforcement against non-EU companies. Source, please? My reading of the GDPR is as a broad set of sensible rules requiring that you acquire consent for gathering and using people's data (and that consent can be revoked -- or withheld for non-core functionality). The law isn't machine code, it's a document interpreted by humans against the spirit of the law: act in good faith and respect people's privacy and you'll be fine. When I see a company that doesn't even want to consider doing business with a European because GDPR, I see a company that I want as far away from my personal data as possible.

neonate 8y ago

http://archive.is/nbuUq http://archive.is/nbuUq