4 ms·

Ask HN: Why paywalled content is not banned yet?

9 points by niksmac 3y ago

Why is HN not banning paywalled contents from medium and similar?

skilled 3y ago
Because you can use Archive.is[0] to post a comment with the un-paywalled article, which is always done for stories that hit the front-page. There are many publishers now that paywall their content, and typically you want the original source as the main submission as opposed to someone's relay of it. [0]: https://archive.is/ https://archive.is/
- meitham 3y ago
  Usually I have no idea that the link I clicked on is behind paywall, and the flow to translate the link to archive.* is too cumbersome on my mobile device, so I would rather know in advance about the accessibility of link. Ideally we add a tag that indicates paywall or free access.
  - skilled 3y ago
    It's a handful of domains that paywall their content. Reuters, NYTimes, WSJ, FT, Business Insider and a few others. It's also not that cumbersome since once you learn the domains, you can directly copy the link before opening and then go to Archive.is and enter the URL in the second form which lets you look up a link if it has been saved already, and in 99% of the cases - if the submission is on the front page, then it has already been archived, not considering the fact that someone has likely made a comment with the live Archive link in the comments.
- dredmorbius 3y ago
  That's worked well for the past few years. In recent weeks, however, Archive Today has been throwing endless CAPTCHA requests to many people. Given that there are few if any well-known alternatives (12ft.io, Ghost Archive, and Google Cache are all far less effective), this is a real problem. I've raised the issue with dang. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37148681 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37148681>
defrost 3y ago
Hmmm. Why stop there though? Should HN the discussion group associated with seed fund investor group Y Combinator also ban discussion of paywalled services? Isn't the least expected lowest bar for entry here that someone should either be able to work around a paywall or alternatively subscribe and support a content source?
throwawaysleep 3y ago
They often have content worth discussing. Why ban over paywalls? Plenty of us have subscriptions.
- niksmac 3y ago
  What you mean by plenty of us? Do we have some data points?
- Terr_ 3y ago
  Well, if you have a subscription, why aren't you discovering/reading/commenting there instead, among people who are definitely able to read the material being discussed? One compromise might be a feature allowing users to permanently block/hide submissions to domains they can't access anyway.
Quinzel 3y ago
Because a paywall is only there as an opportunistic money grab from the people who don’t know how to circumnavigate the paywall. Surely if you’re on hacker news you know how to get around a paywall??
- tamimio 3y ago
  Most of us know how to, nothing really is crazy about it especially for soft paywall, but a lot of the times I (and maybe others) will be using my phone with in-app safari browser for a quick glance at the articles, doing all the workarounds when it can be simply avoided is unnecessary.
tamimio 3y ago
It is annoying, really, and saying it’s paywalled is considered off-topic.. how is it off-topic if I can’t even read the topic! Posting a paywalled content is similar to posting an application that you need to buy-first try-after, and that in a community that usually refuses to use a SaaS because it requires an email address right off the bat.
yuppie_scum 3y ago
Good journalism is worth paying for. For gods sake do you think that news reporting just happens for free? The entitlement people have for free news is one of the major reasons why our political systems have backslid so fast over the past few decades. You get what you pay for.
reify 3y ago
I dont like it either For me it looks like an old pals network with a sense of elitism. All us mates who can afford it can add paywalled links just for us to read together. Oh good one stevie, I really liked the (paywalled) link on hackernews this morning. Shame about the blebs (non IT specialists) not being able to read it eh! It is not inclusive
hilbert42 3y ago
Agreed, paywalls are a nuisance, I'll often click on a story before noticing its source, also the text size is smaller for the source and I don't recognize every paywall. There's a compromise solution, HN could put a red dot or similar next to the article show it's behind the paywall.
simonblack 3y ago
Paywalled content is annoying. But it can be bypassed most of the time by cut'n'pasting the URL into the search fields of either https://archive.is/ https://archive.is/ or https://12ft.io/ https://12ft.io/ If neither of those can let you read it, then just ignore that paywalled URL. They don't get the click, and you haven't lost anything.

9 points by niksmac 3y ago

Why is HN not banning paywalled contents from medium and similar?

Because you can use Archive.is[0] to post a comment with the un-paywalled article, which is always done for stories that hit the front-page. There are many publishers now that paywall their content, and typically you want the original source as the main submission as opposed to someone's relay of it. [0]: https://archive.is/ https://archive.is/

meitham 3y ago
Usually I have no idea that the link I clicked on is behind paywall, and the flow to translate the link to archive.* is too cumbersome on my mobile device, so I would rather know in advance about the accessibility of link. Ideally we add a tag that indicates paywall or free access.
- skilled 3y ago
  It's a handful of domains that paywall their content. Reuters, NYTimes, WSJ, FT, Business Insider and a few others. It's also not that cumbersome since once you learn the domains, you can directly copy the link before opening and then go to Archive.is and enter the URL in the second form which lets you look up a link if it has been saved already, and in 99% of the cases - if the submission is on the front page, then it has already been archived, not considering the fact that someone has likely made a comment with the live Archive link in the comments.
dredmorbius 3y ago
That's worked well for the past few years. In recent weeks, however, Archive Today has been throwing endless CAPTCHA requests to many people. Given that there are few if any well-known alternatives (12ft.io, Ghost Archive, and Google Cache are all far less effective), this is a real problem. I've raised the issue with dang. <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37148681 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37148681>

defrost 3y ago

Hmmm. Why stop there though? Should HN the discussion group associated with seed fund investor group Y Combinator also ban discussion of paywalled services? Isn't the least expected lowest bar for entry here that someone should either be able to work around a paywall or alternatively subscribe and support a content source?

throwawaysleep 3y ago

They often have content worth discussing. Why ban over paywalls? Plenty of us have subscriptions.

niksmac 3y ago
What you mean by plenty of us? Do we have some data points?
Terr_ 3y ago
Well, if you have a subscription, why aren't you discovering/reading/commenting there instead, among people who are definitely able to read the material being discussed? One compromise might be a feature allowing users to permanently block/hide submissions to domains they can't access anyway.

Quinzel 3y ago

Because a paywall is only there as an opportunistic money grab from the people who don’t know how to circumnavigate the paywall. Surely if you’re on hacker news you know how to get around a paywall??

tamimio 3y ago
Most of us know how to, nothing really is crazy about it especially for soft paywall, but a lot of the times I (and maybe others) will be using my phone with in-app safari browser for a quick glance at the articles, doing all the workarounds when it can be simply avoided is unnecessary.

tamimio 3y ago

It is annoying, really, and saying it’s paywalled is considered off-topic.. how is it off-topic if I can’t even read the topic! Posting a paywalled content is similar to posting an application that you need to buy-first try-after, and that in a community that usually refuses to use a SaaS because it requires an email address right off the bat.

yuppie_scum 3y ago

Good journalism is worth paying for. For gods sake do you think that news reporting just happens for free? The entitlement people have for free news is one of the major reasons why our political systems have backslid so fast over the past few decades. You get what you pay for.

reify 3y ago

I dont like it either For me it looks like an old pals network with a sense of elitism. All us mates who can afford it can add paywalled links just for us to read together. Oh good one stevie, I really liked the (paywalled) link on hackernews this morning. Shame about the blebs (non IT specialists) not being able to read it eh! It is not inclusive

hilbert42 3y ago

Agreed, paywalls are a nuisance, I'll often click on a story before noticing its source, also the text size is smaller for the source and I don't recognize every paywall. There's a compromise solution, HN could put a red dot or similar next to the article show it's behind the paywall.

simonblack 3y ago

Paywalled content is annoying. But it can be bypassed most of the time by cut'n'pasting the URL into the search fields of either https://archive.is/ https://archive.is/ or https://12ft.io/ https://12ft.io/ If neither of those can let you read it, then just ignore that paywalled URL. They don't get the click, and you haven't lost anything.