3 ms·

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9795718#up_9796231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9795718#up_9796231 : "we don't ban paywalled sites [because] (a

by dalke 11y ago

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9795718#up_9796231 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9795718#up_9796231 : "we don't ban paywalled sites [because] (a) there are standard workarounds for most paywalls, and (b) banning the WSJ, NYT, New Yorker, Economist, etc. would diminish the quality of HN."

mitkok 11y ago
"(b) banning the WSJ, NYT, New Yorker, Economist, etc. would diminish the quality of HN." By diminish the quality of HN means "they will stop paying us", yeah sure.
- saryant 11y ago
  Yeah, HN is surely a huge source of traffic for the WSJ...
  - easytiger 11y ago
    More likely they don't want to upset them
    - dang 11y ago
      It is my pleasure to confirm that not upsetting the Wall Street Journal appears nowhere on HN's list of priorities. Complaints about paywalled submissions have become so repetitive lately that I think we're going to add this issue to the FAQ and declare it off-topic in the threads. It's fine to suggest an equally good article that isn't paywalled; if it really is equally good, we'll happily swap the URL. It's also fine to ask or share with other users how to read an article. But it's not fine for dozens of threads to bog down with the same generic complaints when this issue has been decided.
      - easytiger 11y ago
        > But it's not fine for dozens of threads to bog down with the same generic complaints when this issue has been decided. I guess one forgets this isn't a community by a community
- dalke 11y ago
  As an observation, in the last few weeks are links to paywalled Science articles, like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9773173 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9773173 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9661641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9661641 , and Nature journals, like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9661148 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9661148 and http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys3366.html http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys... . Are you against those links for the same worry that those journals are paying HN and/or submitters for making the link?
redwood 11y ago
This is News Corp now.
cpncrunch 11y ago
Usually there are other sources for these stories on non-paywalled site. I'm curious as to whether the HN users who upvote these stories actually pay WSJ for access.
- dalke 11y ago
  "...actually pay WSJ for access" - or use the Google search technique to get access, which I just verified works for me. (That is, copy&paste the headline into a Google search and follow the first link to the unrestricted article.)
  - cpncrunch 11y ago
    I'm well aware you can use google to get around it. However I think it's hypocritical for people here to upvote WSJ instead of ad-supported news sites, then post comments saying things like "would you prefer to have adverts?" and "how are journalists supposed to make a living?" if they are actually using google to avoid paying for those services themselves.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Yep, it takes two seconds to get around these paywalls and should be an easy task for anyone who is good with computers, which ought to cover the entire demographic of this site.
    - cpncrunch 11y ago
      Of course I'm aware of that, it's the reasons behind why people are posting WSJ links rather than the likes of techcrunch that I'm curious about (see my comment above).
      - mikeash 11y ago
        You said upvote. I can see being curious about the people who actually post them, and I'd wonder the same thing myself.

by dalke 11y ago

mitkok 11y ago

"(b) banning the WSJ, NYT, New Yorker, Economist, etc. would diminish the quality of HN." By diminish the quality of HN means "they will stop paying us", yeah sure.

saryant 11y ago
Yeah, HN is surely a huge source of traffic for the WSJ...
- easytiger 11y ago
  More likely they don't want to upset them
  - dang 11y ago
    It is my pleasure to confirm that not upsetting the Wall Street Journal appears nowhere on HN's list of priorities. Complaints about paywalled submissions have become so repetitive lately that I think we're going to add this issue to the FAQ and declare it off-topic in the threads. It's fine to suggest an equally good article that isn't paywalled; if it really is equally good, we'll happily swap the URL. It's also fine to ask or share with other users how to read an article. But it's not fine for dozens of threads to bog down with the same generic complaints when this issue has been decided.
    - easytiger 11y ago
      > But it's not fine for dozens of threads to bog down with the same generic complaints when this issue has been decided. I guess one forgets this isn't a community by a community
dalke 11y ago
As an observation, in the last few weeks are links to paywalled Science articles, like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9773173 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9773173 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9661641 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9661641 , and Nature journals, like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9661148 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9661148 and http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys3366.html http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys... . Are you against those links for the same worry that those journals are paying HN and/or submitters for making the link?

redwood 11y ago

This is News Corp now.

cpncrunch 11y ago

Usually there are other sources for these stories on non-paywalled site. I'm curious as to whether the HN users who upvote these stories actually pay WSJ for access.

dalke 11y ago
"...actually pay WSJ for access" - or use the Google search technique to get access, which I just verified works for me. (That is, copy&paste the headline into a Google search and follow the first link to the unrestricted article.)
- cpncrunch 11y ago
  I'm well aware you can use google to get around it. However I think it's hypocritical for people here to upvote WSJ instead of ad-supported news sites, then post comments saying things like "would you prefer to have adverts?" and "how are journalists supposed to make a living?" if they are actually using google to avoid paying for those services themselves.
- mikeash 11y ago
  Yep, it takes two seconds to get around these paywalls and should be an easy task for anyone who is good with computers, which ought to cover the entire demographic of this site.
  - cpncrunch 11y ago
    Of course I'm aware of that, it's the reasons behind why people are posting WSJ links rather than the likes of techcrunch that I'm curious about (see my comment above).
    - mikeash 11y ago
      You said upvote. I can see being curious about the people who actually post them, and I'd wonder the same thing myself.