4 ms·
Seriously curious and off topic, but in almost every HN post these 'no paywall' posts from the WSJ articles are upvoted quite a bit when generally speaking the
by Goopplesoft 12y ago
Seriously curious and off topic, but in almost every HN post these 'no paywall' posts from the WSJ articles are upvoted quite a bit when generally speaking the demographic here seems to be strongly against sharing unlicensed content. Any reason for this? Is WSJ disliked?
- erichurkman 12y agoI dislike paywalls because they are inconsistent. Depending on how you found an article, or what link you click, or what cookies you have, you may or may not be able to view an article. If you happen to reload the page, or accidentally click a link and immediately go back, you may or may not lose access to the article. That's not friendly behavior at all to me as a user.
- jtreminio 12y ago> generally speaking the demographic here seems to be strongly against sharing unlicensed content. No, I don't think that's correct.
- OnyeaboAduba 12y agoI think it because it seen as "information" not "content".
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- bhouston 12y agoI think the issue is that people like me are not going to subscribe to the WSJ just for an article once or twice a month at most. It may be better to not post WSJ articles at all and just find coverage elsewhere (as there almost always is coverage elsewhere.) Too bad they are not more like the NYTs that lets you have a few free articles a month.
- supernova87a 12y agoAll you have to do is open links in an incognito window. Newspapers want to charge for their content, so they track if you've viewed it for free too many times. But they also want people to be able to see a little bit. Hard to have it both ways, so it's simple to get around. It's their problem if they make it too easy.