Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

digiday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 345 posts

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#241

Post by cylinder »

tptacek wrote: post #201

Tangent: I'm not sure I can think of recent money I've spent better than a year-long Washington Post subscription. Not because I want to support journalism (though I do), but because having a whole newspaper to flip through every day is so much more productive and efficient than getting dribs and drabs through Twitter and free news sites --- many of which are ultimately sourcing through the journalism that organizati…

I always grab a print copy when they're available somewhere free but they're really unpleasant to navigate. Especially when you get into the inner pages and have to unfold the whole paper. Unless you're sprawled out on the floor or have a giant table, it's practically impossible.

Interestingly, a real impenetrable paywall makes me respect the print edition more. FT is a good example. I also like their format, layout and paper quality. But they are a financial paper so the economics are better.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#242

Post by freddyc »

douche wrote: post #231
freddyc wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing how many people I know who have subscribed to the WaPo in the last 12 months. I know, I know - echo chamber - but it gives me great hope that quality news organizations have a future. If executed properly, most people are willing to pay for quality content (side note: a major pet peeve of mine is when you pay for a subscription and are then bombarded with obnoxious pop-up ads whenever you try to access s…

> but it gives me great hope that quality news organizations have a future I hope that high quality news organizations do have a future, but the WaPo? I'm not sure that label fits.

Why do you say that? Their political coverage and some of their deep-dive investigative pieces have been top drawer IMO.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#243

Post by stop_thief »

kuschku wrote: post #206
stop_thief wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, that tired old linguistic argument that completely misses the point.

Ah, that tired old PIRATE-COPIER-MURDERER-TERRORIST argument. You do realize that copyright protection is an invention to prevent artists from being fucked over by commercial publishers, and was originally not intended to limit people from copying content noncommercially?

An interesting history lesson, but irrelevant to the current discussion.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#244

Post by icebraining »

stop_thief wrote: post #237
monochromatic wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I steal your car, I've deprived you of the use of your car. If I copy your program, have I deprived you of the use of your program? How is that a linguistic argument?

Because you're using an unreasonably narrow definition of theft that doesn't include intangibles.

Tell that to the SCOTUS:

interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud.

By the way, the infringer was acquitted, since the court agreed he hadn't "stolen, converted or taken by fraud", despite even making money from his infringing activities.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#245

Post by dawnerd »

glenneroo wrote: post #219
tomjen3 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't get is that they could just leave the first two paragraphs and let every see that, then require you to subscribe for more - google would accept that and they would still show up in search, right?

That's what Experts Exchange was doing. Back in the days before Stack Overflow, EE was one of the hot places to go for answers to software engineering problems. It was a free site for many years, then one day they decided to require a subscription to read the answers. Google still indexed the question, so that you would open up a EE link, only to be greeted with "the answer requires a subscription". Google allowed th…

If I remember correctly EE had the real answers waaaaaay down on the page. They were banking on people not scrolling.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#246

Post by tptacek »

icebraining wrote: post #236
tptacek wrote: post #201

Tangent: I'm not sure I can think of recent money I've spent better than a year-long Washington Post subscription. Not because I want to support journalism (though I do), but because having a whole newspaper to flip through every day is so much more productive and efficient than getting dribs and drabs through Twitter and free news sites --- many of which are ultimately sourcing through the journalism that organizati…

Yeah, if you're willing to read a single source, it's not expensive.

This is exactly why I hadn't subscribed in the past: I figured it was pointless, because what I really needed was the gestalt from all the papers.

Boy was that dumb of me. I'm sure I would benefit from having perspectives from the WSJ and NYT to pair with WaPo. But my previous state was having no newspaper at all to rely on, just free sites like (bleh) Slate and (unbelievably bad) cable news web sites like CNN. Adding a single newspaper to that has helped enormously.

And it's not just, or even mostly, about improving my understanding of world affairs. It's that the process I use to bring myself up to speed every day is so much more pleasant than it was before. It's like a version of the blogaverse where everything is reported by professionals. It feels kind of like a miracle.

Like I said: it was worth the money. So much so that I'm kicking myself for not having spent the money before. I would guess I get approximately as much value from the WaPo subscription as I do from Amazon Prime.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#247

Post by tptacek »

douche wrote: post #231
freddyc wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's amazing how many people I know who have subscribed to the WaPo in the last 12 months. I know, I know - echo chamber - but it gives me great hope that quality news organizations have a future. If executed properly, most people are willing to pay for quality content (side note: a major pet peeve of mine is when you pay for a subscription and are then bombarded with obnoxious pop-up ads whenever you try to access s…

> but it gives me great hope that quality news organizations have a future I hope that high quality news organizations do have a future, but the WaPo? I'm not sure that label fits.

Then subscribe to some other paper. You might like the WSJ. The point is not which paper, and let's not waste time litigating the choice.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#248

Post by mudil »

carbocation wrote: post #212
tptacek wrote: post #201

Tangent: I'm not sure I can think of recent money I've spent better than a year-long Washington Post subscription. Not because I want to support journalism (though I do), but because having a whole newspaper to flip through every day is so much more productive and efficient than getting dribs and drabs through Twitter and free news sites --- many of which are ultimately sourcing through the journalism that organizati…

To lower the barrier even further, if you're an Amazon Prime subscriber and subscribe via Amazon, the first 6 months are free and then the cost is $4/month thereafter.

I am trying to find it on Amazon, and failing. Can you please provide a link?

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#249

Post by whatever_dude »

carbocation wrote: post #212
tptacek wrote: post #201

Tangent: I'm not sure I can think of recent money I've spent better than a year-long Washington Post subscription. Not because I want to support journalism (though I do), but because having a whole newspaper to flip through every day is so much more productive and efficient than getting dribs and drabs through Twitter and free news sites --- many of which are ultimately sourcing through the journalism that organizati…

To lower the barrier even further, if you're an Amazon Prime subscriber and subscribe via Amazon, the first 6 months are free and then the cost is $4/month thereafter.

How do you get this deal? I'm having trouble finding it online.

Re: The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely

#250

Post by tptacek »

CSMastermind wrote: post #224
tptacek wrote: post #201

Tangent: I'm not sure I can think of recent money I've spent better than a year-long Washington Post subscription. Not because I want to support journalism (though I do), but because having a whole newspaper to flip through every day is so much more productive and efficient than getting dribs and drabs through Twitter and free news sites --- many of which are ultimately sourcing through the journalism that organizati…

The Wall St. Journal is the single highest quality news source I'm aware of.

I'd have a tough time deciding between the NYT and WSJ next, especially since the editorial/opinion section of the WaPo is the least valuable to me (informed opinion is something you can get everywhere on the Internet for free).

(WaPo vs. NYT was basically a coinflip decision for me, but doing WaPo and then NYT would probably create a pretty significant overlap, and WSJ wouldn't. On the other hand, the NYT is a substantially better site than WSJ).

Post reply on HN