5 ms·

Is there a way to stop news aggregs like HN to stop showing pay walled content

41 points by theGeatZhopa 5y ago

Hi, Just wondering how useful it is to have pay walled content posted on Hackernews and why there is no option to see/block it upfront? More and more content behind the pay wall is posted to HN littering the section. So who is doing it? Why? Getting on one's nerves by suggestions and then hitting the pay wall makes it not more possible to get more subscription. I don't even have the possibility to pay easily and if I see something interesting but paywalled, I look up Google for exact that information - and sometimes find something more interesting than this paywall providers offer. So what's the idea behind making the HN unusable in some terms (Disc. No offense. I just try to understand why this is done and whether the one's doing that is really not realizing, that doing so might have negative impact?)

greenyoda 5y ago
Most of the paywalled sites posted to HN have simple workarounds, such as disabling cookies and/or JavaScript with a browser extension (works for NY Times, Washington Post, etc.), or submitting the URL to a site such as archive.is (even works for the WSJ). Here's what the HN FAQ[1] says about paywalls: > Are paywalls ok? > It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds. > In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic. More here.[2] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?query=paywalls%20by:dang&dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=paywalls%20by:dang&dateRange=a...
- theGeatZhopa 5y ago
  Thank you. Exact what I wanted to know. One does not invest much time into trying to trick the website and just switch the window to Google. Now I'll first try to get past the paywall :)
- sabellito 5y ago
  Aren't the "workarounds" just piracy? It's odd to me that hackernews encourages that.
  - natdempk 5y ago
    I don't know if this is actually a good argument, but the way I view it is they're willing to give out the content for free to many sources, but then restrict it fairly arbitrarily. For example I'll often get paywalled based on the specific device or browser I'm using, which is basically just nonsense in my view. If they're giving the content away for free to archive.is, google caches, etc. I don't really feel bad looking at one of the places they willing give it away to. They could actually paywall the content fully, and some sites do this like the Financial Times. For those, I just don't read their paywalled articles and move on with my life, but for the sites that do give the content away for free sometimes I don't really have a problem. I also do subscribe to some sites that I find particularly valuable where I want to read the truly paywalled content. I think it would be more like piracy if they actually restricted the content and someone who paid for it was re-sharing it. Curious to hear alternative views as well though, as I said I don't actually know if this is a reasonable argument.
  - jolmg 5y ago
    Having the preference to not run javascript on the web does not mean that you're committing piracy against Foo when you ask Foo for content and they give it to you. That's just Foo paywalling some but not all legit forms of access. Some paywalls are complete enough such that they don't give you the content with any legit request. I don't think those sites with incomplete paywalls are because of oversight. There's probably interest in keeping some access open so the content can spread interest and be shared in hubs like HN.
tsjq 5y ago
IMO: paywall links okay. but please share the 'bypass' link also somewhere in the thread.
- muzani 5y ago
  Yeah, nearly all paywalls on HN have the bypass methods in the comments.
- sabellito 5y ago
  Isn't that simply piracy?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
zivkovicp 5y ago
Sometimes using the browser's "reader mode" will show the full article, so you can try that also.
- luke2m 5y ago
  Yep, surprisingly many sites blur with css.
  - ale42 5y ago
    Or have JavaScript removing nodes from DOM after they are actually there... might require some attempts with Reader Mode and reloads (as it's timing dependent) but it's worth a try if you want to read a specific article.
_rpd 5y ago
Counterpoint: high quality journalism must be well funded, and funding based on advertising and 'clickbait' undermines quality. So paywalls it is.
- rini17 5y ago
  Is funding based on annoying prospective readers really better?
  - tonyedgecombe 5y ago
    You are only annoyed because you haven't paid. Therefore your annoyance is irrelevant to them. I must say I have more sympathy for the people creating and selling the content than those trying to get it for free.
    - lobe 5y ago
      For me it's not paying that's the issue, but rather having to sign up to an individual service and pay a monthly fee for every piece you read on every different website. There really needs to be a Spotify for journalism and similar content. I know there are some attempts (apple news for example) but they haven't cracked it yet. The average person skips paywalls for the same reason the average person used to pirate movies. It isn't about cost, but about the most convenient means of access
      - MrTortoise 5y ago
        because spotify has done so many wonderful things for musicians ... oh wait no it hasnt
- theGeatZhopa 5y ago
  Counterpoint accepted. But what they mostly do is some clickbait title and/or teasertext and when you visit that link and start reading ... please pay. That is waisting time, because there is no obvious hint to the pay wall given upfront. I would support, but not if they play tricks on me, or, if they're out of the legislation area I live in. And then, wanting 2.5$ for one article is just transferring the real world to the online. But online is not working on the same principles like the real world.. my thoughts.
joshxyz 5y ago
i really like archive.is. paywalled content is okay, those people gotta earn money to sustain their curation processes.
- dredmorbius 5y ago
  For the past several months, archive.is itself (and its numerous aliases) has been subject to immensely aggressive CAPTCHA blocking. To the point that I usually give up on it. (I'm also opposed to the use of Google and Cloudflare CAPTCHA on several considerations, including but not limited to compatibility and privacy)
draw_down 5y ago
I flag paywalled content when I come across it, personally.
- m-p-3 5y ago
  I wish there was a middle-ground here, where paywalled entries are labelled and filterable.
  - draw_down 5y ago
    My thought is, if it can’t be read it can’t be discussed, so why is it here?
  - atatatat 5y ago
    To dead sibling: because hackers can still read it =]
- gtirloni 5y ago
  Constantly flagging content that should not be flagged (per HN's FAQ) is a sure way to have that privilege removed in the future.
imapeopleperson 5y ago
I’d rather block content with ads
- BizarroLand 5y ago
  May I recommend ublock origin?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
navjack27 5y ago
It would be cool if hacker News just implemented their own archive.is and ran every link posted through that
oriettaxx 5y ago
What happens to me is that sometime I do not realize I am sharing a link that I can see while my friends cannot (maybe because I always clean cookies at every Firefox start, so websites think I am a new user, so I am allowed to see something for awhile?) Anyhow, you are more then right! Btw: a great trick somebody published in HN some years ago still works well for many websites: just add a dot (".") at the end of the domain (not the end of the URL), and the website treats you like an anonymous (so it often lets you see content and bypass the pay wall): I do it with the Guardian, all the time, so https://www.theguardian.com./international https://www.theguardian.com./international instead of https://www.theguardian.com/international https://www.theguardian.com/international (you can even use this https://einaregilsson.com/redirector/ https://einaregilsson.com/redirector/ plugin to automatically rewrite some urls by adding that dot at the end)
duxup 5y ago
Even if I can't read it I like knowing what sites people think have good content.
makeworld 5y ago
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bypass-paywalls-clean/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bypass-paywal... https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean
mbfg 5y ago
Similar to how one sees [PDF] or [2002] in link titles, it would be nice if [PAY] would start being used.
qwerty456127 5y ago
Why would you? I don't like paywalls either - because subscribing to them would mean paying constantly for actually reading just a couple of really interesting articles a year. Nevertheless, when paywalled article makes it to the HN chances are it's worth some extra clicks to bypass the paywall.
jryb 5y ago
There's also a negative impact of not posting paywalled links: it lowers the quality of the content we discuss here. Some really great stuff is behind paywalls. There's a reason people pay for subscriptions when there are still free news sites available.
Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
Hey, I've been tracking this problem - 'Paywall avoidance for submission sites'[1] on my validation platform. I feel there's a need-gap for a solution which tells the website when there are visitors from high traffic sites like HN or particular subreddits to remove the paywall; Technically there's not much to implement as utm_source or ref parameter is enough but the coverage of solution among major media brands is crucial. [1] https://needgap.com/problems/229-paywall-avoidance-for-submission-sites-monetization-news https://needgap.com/problems/229-paywall-avoidance-for-submi...

41 points by theGeatZhopa 5y ago

greenyoda 5y ago

Most of the paywalled sites posted to HN have simple workarounds, such as disabling cookies and/or JavaScript with a browser extension (works for NY Times, Washington Post, etc.), or submitting the URL to a site such as archive.is (even works for the WSJ). Here's what the HN FAQ[1] says about paywalls: > Are paywalls ok? > It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds. > In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic. More here.[2] [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?query=paywalls%20by:dang&dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=paywalls%20by:dang&dateRange=a...

theGeatZhopa 5y ago
Thank you. Exact what I wanted to know. One does not invest much time into trying to trick the website and just switch the window to Google. Now I'll first try to get past the paywall :)
sabellito 5y ago
Aren't the "workarounds" just piracy? It's odd to me that hackernews encourages that.
- natdempk 5y ago
  I don't know if this is actually a good argument, but the way I view it is they're willing to give out the content for free to many sources, but then restrict it fairly arbitrarily. For example I'll often get paywalled based on the specific device or browser I'm using, which is basically just nonsense in my view. If they're giving the content away for free to archive.is, google caches, etc. I don't really feel bad looking at one of the places they willing give it away to. They could actually paywall the content fully, and some sites do this like the Financial Times. For those, I just don't read their paywalled articles and move on with my life, but for the sites that do give the content away for free sometimes I don't really have a problem. I also do subscribe to some sites that I find particularly valuable where I want to read the truly paywalled content. I think it would be more like piracy if they actually restricted the content and someone who paid for it was re-sharing it. Curious to hear alternative views as well though, as I said I don't actually know if this is a reasonable argument.
- jolmg 5y ago
  Having the preference to not run javascript on the web does not mean that you're committing piracy against Foo when you ask Foo for content and they give it to you. That's just Foo paywalling some but not all legit forms of access. Some paywalls are complete enough such that they don't give you the content with any legit request. I don't think those sites with incomplete paywalls are because of oversight. There's probably interest in keeping some access open so the content can spread interest and be shared in hubs like HN.

tsjq 5y ago

IMO: paywall links okay. but please share the 'bypass' link also somewhere in the thread.

muzani 5y ago
Yeah, nearly all paywalls on HN have the bypass methods in the comments.
sabellito 5y ago
Isn't that simply piracy?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

zivkovicp 5y ago

Sometimes using the browser's "reader mode" will show the full article, so you can try that also.

luke2m 5y ago
Yep, surprisingly many sites blur with css.
- ale42 5y ago
  Or have JavaScript removing nodes from DOM after they are actually there... might require some attempts with Reader Mode and reloads (as it's timing dependent) but it's worth a try if you want to read a specific article.

_rpd 5y ago

Counterpoint: high quality journalism must be well funded, and funding based on advertising and 'clickbait' undermines quality. So paywalls it is.

rini17 5y ago
Is funding based on annoying prospective readers really better?
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  You are only annoyed because you haven't paid. Therefore your annoyance is irrelevant to them. I must say I have more sympathy for the people creating and selling the content than those trying to get it for free.
  - lobe 5y ago
    For me it's not paying that's the issue, but rather having to sign up to an individual service and pay a monthly fee for every piece you read on every different website. There really needs to be a Spotify for journalism and similar content. I know there are some attempts (apple news for example) but they haven't cracked it yet. The average person skips paywalls for the same reason the average person used to pirate movies. It isn't about cost, but about the most convenient means of access
    - MrTortoise 5y ago
      because spotify has done so many wonderful things for musicians ... oh wait no it hasnt
theGeatZhopa 5y ago
Counterpoint accepted. But what they mostly do is some clickbait title and/or teasertext and when you visit that link and start reading ... please pay. That is waisting time, because there is no obvious hint to the pay wall given upfront. I would support, but not if they play tricks on me, or, if they're out of the legislation area I live in. And then, wanting 2.5$ for one article is just transferring the real world to the online. But online is not working on the same principles like the real world.. my thoughts.

joshxyz 5y ago

i really like archive.is. paywalled content is okay, those people gotta earn money to sustain their curation processes.

dredmorbius 5y ago
For the past several months, archive.is itself (and its numerous aliases) has been subject to immensely aggressive CAPTCHA blocking. To the point that I usually give up on it. (I'm also opposed to the use of Google and Cloudflare CAPTCHA on several considerations, including but not limited to compatibility and privacy)

draw_down 5y ago

I flag paywalled content when I come across it, personally.

m-p-3 5y ago
I wish there was a middle-ground here, where paywalled entries are labelled and filterable.
- draw_down 5y ago
  My thought is, if it can’t be read it can’t be discussed, so why is it here?
- atatatat 5y ago
  To dead sibling: because hackers can still read it =]
gtirloni 5y ago
Constantly flagging content that should not be flagged (per HN's FAQ) is a sure way to have that privilege removed in the future.

imapeopleperson 5y ago

I’d rather block content with ads

BizarroLand 5y ago
May I recommend ublock origin?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

navjack27 5y ago

It would be cool if hacker News just implemented their own archive.is and ran every link posted through that

oriettaxx 5y ago

What happens to me is that sometime I do not realize I am sharing a link that I can see while my friends cannot (maybe because I always clean cookies at every Firefox start, so websites think I am a new user, so I am allowed to see something for awhile?) Anyhow, you are more then right! Btw: a great trick somebody published in HN some years ago still works well for many websites: just add a dot (".") at the end of the domain (not the end of the URL), and the website treats you like an anonymous (so it often lets you see content and bypass the pay wall): I do it with the Guardian, all the time, so https://www.theguardian.com./international https://www.theguardian.com./international instead of https://www.theguardian.com/international https://www.theguardian.com/international (you can even use this https://einaregilsson.com/redirector/ https://einaregilsson.com/redirector/ plugin to automatically rewrite some urls by adding that dot at the end)

duxup 5y ago

Even if I can't read it I like knowing what sites people think have good content.

makeworld 5y ago

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bypass-paywalls-clean/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bypass-paywal... https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean

mbfg 5y ago

Similar to how one sees [PDF] or [2002] in link titles, it would be nice if [PAY] would start being used.

qwerty456127 5y ago

Why would you? I don't like paywalls either - because subscribing to them would mean paying constantly for actually reading just a couple of really interesting articles a year. Nevertheless, when paywalled article makes it to the HN chances are it's worth some extra clicks to bypass the paywall.

jryb 5y ago

There's also a negative impact of not posting paywalled links: it lowers the quality of the content we discuss here. Some really great stuff is behind paywalls. There's a reason people pay for subscriptions when there are still free news sites available.

Abishek_Muthian 5y ago

Hey, I've been tracking this problem - 'Paywall avoidance for submission sites'[1] on my validation platform. I feel there's a need-gap for a solution which tells the website when there are visitors from high traffic sites like HN or particular subreddits to remove the paywall; Technically there's not much to implement as utm_source or ref parameter is enough but the coverage of solution among major media brands is crucial. [1] https://needgap.com/problems/229-paywall-avoidance-for-submission-sites-monetization-news https://needgap.com/problems/229-paywall-avoidance-for-submi...