4 ms·

What's the point of submitting paywalled content? Edit: This is an honest question, looking for an actual answer. Is the point just to comment on the headline?

taurath 7y ago
Paywalled content can be a lot better than ad-supported content.
- aldoushuxley001 7y ago
  not when submitting it to a news aggregator, considering noone else can read it... we're all literally just gonna comment on the headline then? But otherwise, in the general sense, I agree with you that paywalled or subscription-based content can often be preferable to ad-based content.
bookofjoe 7y ago
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/science/5g-cellphones-wireless-cancer.html?emc=rss&partner=rss https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/science/5g-cellphones-wir...
- aldoushuxley001 7y ago
  also paywalled
jwr 7y ago
I don't know. I often wish for a browser plugin that would simply remove all paywalled content from HN. I do pay for content myself (The Economist), but I think it's ridiculous that these days to read HN links I'd need to have 5-6 subscriptions. In other words: if it's behind a paywall, it's for subscribers only, and it has no place on the open web, thus on HN.
KiDD 7y ago
http://archive.fo/c7gjH http://archive.fo/c7gjH I love archive.today!
Jarwain 7y ago
NY Times has a "number of articles read"-type pay wall. If you surpass X articles in a month then they make you log in, or pay or something. As a result, the submitter may not have realized that the article is conditionally paywalled. Personally, I managed to read the article just fine.
DanBC 7y ago
You politely asked a good faith question. I think the downvotes are unfair. Here's what one of the HN mods has said about paywalls: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 I have a tor window open most of the time so I usually just copy paste the url into that.

taurath 7y ago

Paywalled content can be a lot better than ad-supported content.

aldoushuxley001 7y ago
not when submitting it to a news aggregator, considering noone else can read it... we're all literally just gonna comment on the headline then? But otherwise, in the general sense, I agree with you that paywalled or subscription-based content can often be preferable to ad-based content.

bookofjoe 7y ago

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/science/5g-cellphones-wireless-cancer.html?emc=rss&partner=rss https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/science/5g-cellphones-wir...

aldoushuxley001 7y ago
also paywalled

jwr 7y ago

I don't know. I often wish for a browser plugin that would simply remove all paywalled content from HN. I do pay for content myself (The Economist), but I think it's ridiculous that these days to read HN links I'd need to have 5-6 subscriptions. In other words: if it's behind a paywall, it's for subscribers only, and it has no place on the open web, thus on HN.

KiDD 7y ago

http://archive.fo/c7gjH http://archive.fo/c7gjH I love archive.today!

Jarwain 7y ago

NY Times has a "number of articles read"-type pay wall. If you surpass X articles in a month then they make you log in, or pay or something. As a result, the submitter may not have realized that the article is conditionally paywalled. Personally, I managed to read the article just fine.

DanBC 7y ago

You politely asked a good faith question. I think the downvotes are unfair. Here's what one of the HN mods has said about paywalls: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989 I have a tor window open most of the time so I usually just copy paste the url into that.