31–40 of 54 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
8 million dollars over 1600 journalists is $5000 each. Pewdipie doesnt have the costs of running a news company and hes not in the news industry
Yeah, thats 8 million a month. i feel like 5k a month is pretty good pay for a journalist.
Do you think the 1,600 journalists at The New York Times, many of whom work in difficult environments (including the White House, lol), should work for free? Quite the Scrooge move.
NYT one of the largest most profitable companies pretends to show you an article baits you and demands money and you are a scrooge for not paying? In that context they are the rich entity and should give the content away (the way Scrooge should have). No where in the story does it mention Tiny Tim finding coal in Scroogle's garbage and someone stopping him and calling him cheap for not paying full price because Scrooge employes so many people.
Do you think the 1,600 journalists at The New York Times, many of whom work in difficult environments (including the White House, lol), should work for free? Quite the Scrooge move.
I felt forced to disable cookies and javascript on the following sites just after exclusively clicking on links submitted to HN: NYT, Medium, Washington Post, Bloomberg, MIT Technology Review and Harvard Business Review.
I'd prefer if submitters choose more user-respecting sources, but until then I refuse to feel guilty over stopping these intrusive sites and their dark patterns.
Do you think the 1,600 journalists at The New York Times, many of whom work in difficult environments (including the White House, lol), should work for free? Quite the Scrooge move.
Do you think the 1,600 journalists at The New York Times, many of whom work in difficult environments (including the White House, lol), should work for free? Quite the Scrooge move.
I think a lot of what you need to know about (a swathe of) the Hacker News community is that I get voted down for pointing out that you're stealing content.
To steal is "to take illegally, or without the owner's permission, something owned by someone else" - can't really take the bits from NYT - after someone reads their article without paying them NYT has no less bits than they had before.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sidebar: working for and writing at tbe NYT - or any "news" publisher - doesn't make you a journalist. Journalist is a process and a result. We're too quick to use the word journalist. The low bar should not be so normalized.
Lol. NYT = "low bar". You're living in an alternate reality.
You reflecting their approach (i.e.,unable to be objective) is nothing short of vindication (for me).
This one is also quite helpful: https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-firefox ... for all of the folks out there who don't have a university picking up the tab for the articles that they want to read. It's important to remember that paywalls disproportionately impact those who are not "working" in an academic setting.
And evading paywalls disproportionately impacts the journalists creating the stories you seem to value, though for some reason refuse to pay for.
I thank Aaron Swartz and his co-conspirators every time I download something from one of those sites. I could always walk over to a nearby university and use their public wifi to download much of this material through more "legitimate" channels ... but have to admit that it wouldn't provide the same thrill as just stealing it.
It's also comforting to know that no girls (as young as 10-years of age) had to be sexually exploited by a monster like Jeffrey Epstein in order to cover my subscription to these materials (Epstein allegedly donated millions to universities like MIT ... much of which they deliberately tried to cover up until exposed by a courageous whistle-blower in the Media Lab).
Ironic that this was the same squeaky clean institution that handed a "criminal trespasser" like Swartz over to the Feds so that they could spank his ass hard, ain't it?
Do you think the 1,600 journalists at The New York Times, many of whom work in difficult environments (including the White House, lol), should work for free? Quite the Scrooge move.
Calling someone a scrooge or cheap for finding a hole in a technical limitation device that is sloppy in its implementation as it is click-bait in it's dark patterns of pretending the page is an open page/free page so it can compete in the search engines but in reality it presents a paid-gate that only appears after leading content is very unhackernews like. NYT one of the largest most profitable companies pretends t…
This is the most important point here. If your content is not actually public, you really shouldn't get the benefits of search engine exposure, HN exposure, or even the distribution from sharing what appears to be a URL to a hypertext document.
This one is also quite helpful: https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-firefox ... for all of the folks out there who don't have a university picking up the tab for the articles that they want to read. It's important to remember that paywalls disproportionately impact those who are not "working" in an academic setting.
And evading paywalls disproportionately impacts the journalists creating the stories you seem to value, though for some reason refuse to pay for.
this it's literally facilitating copyright infringement if you don't want to pay for them is fine, just don't read them