3 ms·
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 publ
by 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 agoUsually 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 agoIt'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if it has been saved already, and in 99% of the cases - if the submission is on the front page, then it has already been archived, not considering the fact that someone has likely made a comment with the live Archive link in the comments.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 agoThat'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>