6 ms·

Many sites don't contains the full content even if you do that. I'm not sure of how it works (does it subscribed to them all?) but https://archive.ph/ https://

Many sites don't contains the full content even if you do that. I'm not sure of how it works (does it subscribed to them all?) but https://archive.ph/ https://archive.ph/ is a good way to see the content in those cases. But really, if you are regularly reading content on a site you should subscribe to support the journalists employed there.

vie00001 4y ago
> I'm not sure of how it works (does it subscribed to them all?) but https://archive.ph/ https://archive.ph/ is a good way to see the content in those cases. I think for search engine crawlers there are versions without a paywall so these articles can get fully indexed. Archive.ph, and similar services, might get the full content this way somehow. But I am just guessing.
- crakenzak 4y ago
  you're spot on, this is exactly how sites like archive.org, archive.ph, or even if you click on "view cached version" on Google get the non-paywalled versions.
- maxboone 4y ago
  archive.ph also uses (donated) logins to archive (paywalled) content, however those accounts do get blocked from time to time. https://blog.archive.today/post/678202832257794048/why-cant-instagram-pages-be-archived-anymore https://blog.archive.today/post/678202832257794048/why-cant-... While pretending to be GoogleBot used to get you full articles (or grabbing them from cache) this doesn't seem to be the case for some sites anymore. They just give the first part of the article without the paywall, as that's usually enough for SEO purposes.
  - jhncls 4y ago
    > They just give the first part of the article without the paywall, as that's usually enough for SEO purposes. Many consumers often wouldn't read more text anyway. About one paragraph might even be too much to fill the modern attention span.
- qingdao99 4y ago
  Yes, it's called dynamic rendering when you serve different content based on the user agent, but it's apparently not recommended anymore. https://searchengineland.com/google-no-longer-recommends-using-dynamic-rendering-for-google-search-387054 https://searchengineland.com/google-no-longer-recommends-usi...
felixthehat 4y ago
https://12ft.io https://12ft.io is another good one but yes agreed, you should cough up for the subscription when possible
- bin_bash 4y ago
  I've tried that on like 3 or 4 different sites and it didn't work for a single one
  - cmuff 4y ago
    I noticed too this site is having issues lately. It usually works for me. Either that, or sites have figured out its trick to bypass.
    - telotortium 4y ago
      FWIW, I read once that 12ft.io has the business model of charging businesses for the right to stop 12ft.io working on their site.
- terrycody 4y ago
  No, this website, I never succeed even one time...
jelangkung 4y ago
this. bloomberg.com for instance, hides pay walled lines in empty <div>s. the other method is to disable javascript and cookies (works on nytimes.com), or press ESC key to stop page loading before paywall kicks in (works on telegraph.co.uk) :)
izietto 4y ago
> But really, if you are regularly reading content on a site you should subscribe to support the journalists employed there I'd go further than your statement: I try not to read paywalled contents. Actually I don't get all these workarounds about paywalls. I'm like "they don't want me to read it? I'm not going to read it then".
- donohoe 4y ago
  But they do want you to read. They also want to be financially viable.
  - izietto 4y ago
    Sure, they want me to read if I think they are worth to have my subscription. But I don't think they are worth to have my subscription, otherwise I would subscribe them. So I don't read.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
phemartin 4y ago
Is this even legal? How can sites host other ones' content, and that's ok? - Is it fair use because it's "archiving" the web? - Is it because it's on the open web and it's public domain? - Or is it illegal, and people do it because they can ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- mik1998 4y ago
  Is caching illegal?
  - 7952 4y ago
    Caching is a generic technology that can be used in lawful or unlawful ways.
  - donohoe 4y ago
    What archive.ph does is not just caching, it is hosting. Technically it is illegal. Do I use it? Yes.
    - mik1998 4y ago
      How do you "cache" without "hosting"? What is the technical difference between those two acts?
      - navigate8310 4y ago
        Caching is parroting what the original poster publishes. If the OP asks not to index, you cease indexing. However, if you are purposeful "hosting," you may not accept and continue hosting, knowing all the legal consequences that may follow.
        mik1998 4y ago
        Caching has nothing to do with indexing. If I set up an HTTP cache to serve cached websites on my network, it would be difficult for anyone to request to not cache the HTTP responses considering it is most likely they would not be aware of them at all. It is, however, exactly equivalent to what websites such as archive.ph are doing.
dkdbejwi383 4y ago
> But really, if you are regularly reading content on a site you should subscribe to support the journalists employed there. While there are some paywalled websites that allow you to read _n_ articles per period for "free", there are many that don't. How do I know in this case whether it's worth the cost? There are also times where I'll see a link to something behind a paywall with an interesting headline (frequently on HN), but from a publication I don't regularly read, so have no intention of a subscription. It would be nice in this case to be able to pay a one-time, small contribution. Worth stating I don't disagree necessarily with the sentiment, there are just a few "edge cases" that make it impractical.
DennisP 4y ago
I subscribe to a major newspaper. But I'm not going to subscribe to all major newspapers. The individual subscription model doesn't really fit a world where you can go to one site, and click links to articles from lots of different publications. If they had a common subscription, where you pay one reasonable fee and they divide it up according to whose articles you read, I'd subscribe to that. Since they don't, I subscribe to one paper and do workarounds on the others. I feel this is ethical because if everyone did it, with a decently random distribution, then the newspapers would survive just fine. They'd make the same overall revenue as when everyone had one newspaper, showing up at their doorstep each morning.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- k_sze 4y ago
  How about getting a paid membership for certain higher education institutions’ libraries, which will give you access to not only books, but also a plethora of periodicals. And that will be fully legal and ethical.
  - enumjorge 4y ago
    Do you have examples of institutions that do this? A Google search only returned subscriptions to access research papers but not books or periodicals.
  - DennisP 4y ago
    Will a library membership remove the hassle when I click a link from reddit?
- samwillis 4y ago
  > If they had a common subscription, where you pay one reasonable fee and they divide it up according to whose articles you read So some extent that's what Apple News+ (included in Apple One) is. But it doesn't do multi region stuff I don't think, and misses some major publications.
- 4y ago
grishka 4y ago
I stumbled upon a link to an article with an interesting headline. I would like to read it, so I click the link, but there's a paywall. I have no idea what site that even is. This is the first and probably last time I'm seeing it. No way it gets a single cent from me. This just can't work when there are so many news websites competing for subscriptions. Yes, archive.ph works most of the time, can't recommend it enough.
enumjorge 4y ago
I’d be more willing to subscribe if publications didn’t pull the dark pattern of making signing up fast and easy, but then requiring a call to a rep to cancel. I used to subscribe to the nytimes but a few years ago I needed a break from news. My plan was to come back in 6-12 months, but they made me wait on the phone for 25 mins for something that should have taken a couple of minutes on their site. I cancelled and never went back.
- monksy 4y ago
  I was going to subscribe to NYTdigital .. but I saw the reviews talking about this experience.
- kvdveer 4y ago
  Move to the Netherlands. The medium used to sign up, should be available to cancel. Cancellation can't be harder than signing up, and (barring a few exceptions), you can't have an autorenew period of longer than a month, after an initial year. These may actually be EU rules BTW, haven't checked.
- AdamJacobMuller 4y ago
  privacy.com
- huy77 4y ago
  the browser should have a wallet feature, instead of asking you to subscribe, just pay for one article you want to read
- nicwolff 4y ago
  You could suspend your subscription. (Shhh – suspending print delivery doesn't interrupt your access to the site or the Replica Edition ツ)
- gorkish 4y ago
  My secret weapon for cutting through the call-to-cancel CSR script with a machete is the following: "May I ask why you want to cancel your account today?" "No, you may not." For some insane reason they ALL phrase the question this way, enabling this little grammatical gem of a response. Enjoy.
terrycody 4y ago
+1 for this. This website almost succeed every time I run out of my tricks, like: 1) ESC to interrupt the page load 2) quickly hit "view mode" before the wall appears 3) add a "." behind the .com, so like .com./ 4) visit in incognito window when the tokens run out (e.g. Medium) 5) Check Google cache of this page, (you can quickly add cache: URL to visit the cache page) 6) Check archive.org cache of some lost pages 7) maybe some extensions but I seldom use them nowadays 8) before, there are some cool sites like, sorry I forgot the names, all stopped working, those websites can remove paypall 9) console tricks though I dunno.

vie00001 4y ago

> I'm not sure of how it works (does it subscribed to them all?) but https://archive.ph/ https://archive.ph/ is a good way to see the content in those cases. I think for search engine crawlers there are versions without a paywall so these articles can get fully indexed. Archive.ph, and similar services, might get the full content this way somehow. But I am just guessing.

crakenzak 4y ago
you're spot on, this is exactly how sites like archive.org, archive.ph, or even if you click on "view cached version" on Google get the non-paywalled versions.
maxboone 4y ago
archive.ph also uses (donated) logins to archive (paywalled) content, however those accounts do get blocked from time to time. https://blog.archive.today/post/678202832257794048/why-cant-instagram-pages-be-archived-anymore https://blog.archive.today/post/678202832257794048/why-cant-... While pretending to be GoogleBot used to get you full articles (or grabbing them from cache) this doesn't seem to be the case for some sites anymore. They just give the first part of the article without the paywall, as that's usually enough for SEO purposes.
- jhncls 4y ago
  > They just give the first part of the article without the paywall, as that's usually enough for SEO purposes. Many consumers often wouldn't read more text anyway. About one paragraph might even be too much to fill the modern attention span.
qingdao99 4y ago
Yes, it's called dynamic rendering when you serve different content based on the user agent, but it's apparently not recommended anymore. https://searchengineland.com/google-no-longer-recommends-using-dynamic-rendering-for-google-search-387054 https://searchengineland.com/google-no-longer-recommends-usi...

felixthehat 4y ago

https://12ft.io https://12ft.io is another good one but yes agreed, you should cough up for the subscription when possible

bin_bash 4y ago
I've tried that on like 3 or 4 different sites and it didn't work for a single one
- cmuff 4y ago
  I noticed too this site is having issues lately. It usually works for me. Either that, or sites have figured out its trick to bypass.
  - telotortium 4y ago
    FWIW, I read once that 12ft.io has the business model of charging businesses for the right to stop 12ft.io working on their site.
terrycody 4y ago
No, this website, I never succeed even one time...

jelangkung 4y ago

this. bloomberg.com for instance, hides pay walled lines in empty <div>s. the other method is to disable javascript and cookies (works on nytimes.com), or press ESC key to stop page loading before paywall kicks in (works on telegraph.co.uk) :)

izietto 4y ago

> But really, if you are regularly reading content on a site you should subscribe to support the journalists employed there I'd go further than your statement: I try not to read paywalled contents. Actually I don't get all these workarounds about paywalls. I'm like "they don't want me to read it? I'm not going to read it then".

donohoe 4y ago
But they do want you to read. They also want to be financially viable.
- izietto 4y ago
  Sure, they want me to read if I think they are worth to have my subscription. But I don't think they are worth to have my subscription, otherwise I would subscribe them. So I don't read.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

phemartin 4y ago

Is this even legal? How can sites host other ones' content, and that's ok? - Is it fair use because it's "archiving" the web? - Is it because it's on the open web and it's public domain? - Or is it illegal, and people do it because they can ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

mik1998 4y ago
Is caching illegal?
- 7952 4y ago
  Caching is a generic technology that can be used in lawful or unlawful ways.
- donohoe 4y ago
  What archive.ph does is not just caching, it is hosting. Technically it is illegal. Do I use it? Yes.
  - mik1998 4y ago
    How do you "cache" without "hosting"? What is the technical difference between those two acts?
    - navigate8310 4y ago
      Caching is parroting what the original poster publishes. If the OP asks not to index, you cease indexing. However, if you are purposeful "hosting," you may not accept and continue hosting, knowing all the legal consequences that may follow.
      - mik1998 4y ago
        Caching has nothing to do with indexing. If I set up an HTTP cache to serve cached websites on my network, it would be difficult for anyone to request to not cache the HTTP responses considering it is most likely they would not be aware of them at all. It is, however, exactly equivalent to what websites such as archive.ph are doing.

dkdbejwi383 4y ago

> But really, if you are regularly reading content on a site you should subscribe to support the journalists employed there. While there are some paywalled websites that allow you to read _n_ articles per period for "free", there are many that don't. How do I know in this case whether it's worth the cost? There are also times where I'll see a link to something behind a paywall with an interesting headline (frequently on HN), but from a publication I don't regularly read, so have no intention of a subscription. It would be nice in this case to be able to pay a one-time, small contribution. Worth stating I don't disagree necessarily with the sentiment, there are just a few "edge cases" that make it impractical.

DennisP 4y ago

I subscribe to a major newspaper. But I'm not going to subscribe to all major newspapers. The individual subscription model doesn't really fit a world where you can go to one site, and click links to articles from lots of different publications. If they had a common subscription, where you pay one reasonable fee and they divide it up according to whose articles you read, I'd subscribe to that. Since they don't, I subscribe to one paper and do workarounds on the others. I feel this is ethical because if everyone did it, with a decently random distribution, then the newspapers would survive just fine. They'd make the same overall revenue as when everyone had one newspaper, showing up at their doorstep each morning.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
k_sze 4y ago
How about getting a paid membership for certain higher education institutions’ libraries, which will give you access to not only books, but also a plethora of periodicals. And that will be fully legal and ethical.
- enumjorge 4y ago
  Do you have examples of institutions that do this? A Google search only returned subscriptions to access research papers but not books or periodicals.
- DennisP 4y ago
  Will a library membership remove the hassle when I click a link from reddit?
samwillis 4y ago
> If they had a common subscription, where you pay one reasonable fee and they divide it up according to whose articles you read So some extent that's what Apple News+ (included in Apple One) is. But it doesn't do multi region stuff I don't think, and misses some major publications.
4y ago

grishka 4y ago

I stumbled upon a link to an article with an interesting headline. I would like to read it, so I click the link, but there's a paywall. I have no idea what site that even is. This is the first and probably last time I'm seeing it. No way it gets a single cent from me. This just can't work when there are so many news websites competing for subscriptions. Yes, archive.ph works most of the time, can't recommend it enough.

enumjorge 4y ago

I’d be more willing to subscribe if publications didn’t pull the dark pattern of making signing up fast and easy, but then requiring a call to a rep to cancel. I used to subscribe to the nytimes but a few years ago I needed a break from news. My plan was to come back in 6-12 months, but they made me wait on the phone for 25 mins for something that should have taken a couple of minutes on their site. I cancelled and never went back.

monksy 4y ago
I was going to subscribe to NYTdigital .. but I saw the reviews talking about this experience.
kvdveer 4y ago
Move to the Netherlands. The medium used to sign up, should be available to cancel. Cancellation can't be harder than signing up, and (barring a few exceptions), you can't have an autorenew period of longer than a month, after an initial year. These may actually be EU rules BTW, haven't checked.
AdamJacobMuller 4y ago
privacy.com
huy77 4y ago
the browser should have a wallet feature, instead of asking you to subscribe, just pay for one article you want to read
nicwolff 4y ago
You could suspend your subscription. (Shhh – suspending print delivery doesn't interrupt your access to the site or the Replica Edition ツ)
gorkish 4y ago
My secret weapon for cutting through the call-to-cancel CSR script with a machete is the following: "May I ask why you want to cancel your account today?" "No, you may not." For some insane reason they ALL phrase the question this way, enabling this little grammatical gem of a response. Enjoy.

terrycody 4y ago

+1 for this. This website almost succeed every time I run out of my tricks, like: 1) ESC to interrupt the page load 2) quickly hit "view mode" before the wall appears 3) add a "." behind the .com, so like .com./ 4) visit in incognito window when the tokens run out (e.g. Medium) 5) Check Google cache of this page, (you can quickly add cache: URL to visit the cache page) 6) Check archive.org cache of some lost pages 7) maybe some extensions but I seldom use them nowadays 8) before, there are some cool sites like, sorry I forgot the names, all stopped working, those websites can remove paypall 9) console tricks though I dunno.