3 ms·
Archived: http://archive.is/p3ZK7 http://archive.is/p3ZK7
by throwaway8291 7y ago
Archived: http://archive.is/p3ZK7 http://archive.is/p3ZK7
- kauffj 7y agoThank you for providing this. Please avoid clicking the OP link and giving traffic to a company that engages in gray/black web and SEO patterns.
- sanj 7y agoAre you referring to The NY Times? I typically want to send traffic to the original content providers and creators.
- Double_a_92 7y agoThe articles on NYT get paywalled after some time... So it's pretty useless to post them here without an archive link. I think the archive.is problem is with the ".is" domain and some DNS issue. It's recommended to share the http://archive.today/p3ZK7 http://archive.today/p3ZK7 link.
- necovek 7y agoI think it's a tough balance: I personally want to support original content creators but to discourage anti-patterns like showing different versions to different consumers (other than for usability purposes): that helps make search less useful. Eg. there might be better content from a smaller producer, but a big one like NY Times will shadow it.
- nailer 7y agoI do too, but after the text pops up and I start reading it, I'm in some kind of (non-paywall) photo album about the people involved, I haven't clicked on anything, I'm just trying to read.
- Mountain_Skies 7y agoInteresting take since archive.is refuses connections from Brave.
- asah 7y agodownvote: this piece was well researched and a piece of art itself, and not just another NYT throwaway op-ed. If you don't want the world to be twitter rants and facebook meme reposts, we need to support pieces like this, and the publications that fund and publish them.