51–59 of 59 posts
I can say from personal experience that the extension used to work almost perfectly up until recently. Paywalled sites have started to catch on and are starting to place their articles on entirely different pages than the "preview" page so there's nothing to "bypass".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly have a really hard time believing that the reason newspapers are so expensive to run these days is due to web hosting costs—I would imagine that most of their budget is spent on staffing (though I couldn't find a budget breakdown with a quick search, so I'm only guessing here). As a side question: what are you reading about that independent blogs consistently offer the same quality of reporting as major ne…
> I honestly have a really hard time believing that the reason newspapers are so expensive to run these days is due to web hosting costs All those metrics and analytics and anti-adblock services can really add up. The largest assets on an average, e.g., NYTimes article are 2mb+ scripts; not images
So, in the end, the actual information almost does not exist. /s
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Even the archived links people post in the comments are inaccessible because CloudFlare. Actually it's not caused by cloudflare on two counts: cloudflare actually isn't a source of the captcha, the site author copied cloudflare's captcha page; and the site blocks cloudflare dns users because it doesn't send EDNS information.
> cloudflare actually isn't a source of the captcha, the site author copied cloudflare's captcha page Why hasn't Cloudflare sued for trademark infringement?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's very doubtable. The people who won't pay for a one month subscription won't pay a dollar to read an article either. Then they'll say "Oh, it's such a hassle to provide my payment information for something that is just a dollar". These paywalled magazines know the customers better than the customers themselves.
The reason I mostly don't subscribe is I follow lots of aggregator links to lots of different publications, and I don't read enough at any one publication to subscribe. Micropayments would solve that for me, if they were reasonable (not a dollar per article) and just a simple button click, and I trusted that the article wasn't clickbait. Another business model would be some kind of group subscription to all the major…
There was a "national model" in Eastern Europe, that offered one subscription to multiple services, but the company evolved to provide individual solutions. While it was good for the consumer, you essentially had competing newspapers under one subscription and if they wanted to raise the price they needed to cooperate. That didn't work out.
Then there was blendle - a service that offered a similar approach, but for micropayments - provide credit card once and pay as you read. They pivoted to subscriptions as the model wasn't working: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blendle
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason I mostly don't subscribe is I follow lots of aggregator links to lots of different publications, and I don't read enough at any one publication to subscribe. Micropayments would solve that for me, if they were reasonable (not a dollar per article) and just a simple button click, and I trusted that the article wasn't clickbait. Another business model would be some kind of group subscription to all the major…
> Another business model would be some kind of group subscription to all the major papers and magazines. They could keep track of whose articles I read and distribute my payment among themselves. I believe this is the future. Not only for traditional newspapers and magazines, but for all written content of quality online. Massive syndicates of blogs and websites under common subscription umbrellas. Like video streami…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They should be platforms of journalism. There are plenty of other venues available for "important people" to share their views. A news outlet lending credibility by uncritically publishing an opinion is not journalism.
A news outlets lends credibility by publishing an op-ed as much as Samsung lends credibility to what you're saying when you're on the phone with somebody. Newspapers have always been and should be part of the public sphere. Their mission should be to investigate, interview, report, publish, and let the reader form her own opinion. Not to shove their own opinions down the reader's throat. A serious newspaper will inte…
Then you created a strawman argument to knock down. If they do anything, I'd actually like them to research the statements made and publish the facts instead of publishing the statements directly under their headline. They don't need to put their heads in the sand.
Maybe spending less time reading biased op-eds would help you develop better skills in this area.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A news outlets lends credibility by publishing an op-ed as much as Samsung lends credibility to what you're saying when you're on the phone with somebody. Newspapers have always been and should be part of the public sphere. Their mission should be to investigate, interview, report, publish, and let the reader form her own opinion. Not to shove their own opinions down the reader's throat. A serious newspaper will inte…
You contradict yourself by saying both the platform should publish important people and that the platform is not lending credibility. Which is it? Then you created a strawman argument to knock down. If they do anything, I'd actually like them to research the statements made and publish the facts instead of publishing the statements directly under their headline. They don't need to put their heads in the sand. Maybe s…
> If they do anything, I'd actually like them to research the statements made and publish the facts instead of publishing the statements directly under their headline.
That's exactly what they almost always do, if such statements are made. But usually there will be an opponent refuting the claims in his own op-ed in tomorrow's newspaper.
>You contradict yourself by saying both the platform should publish important people and that the platform is not lending credibility. Which is it?
Where is the contradiction? If you understand that opinion is different from reporting, then there is no credibility lending or borrowing. Likewise a newspaper doesn't endorse eating at Subway just because they print one of their ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Besides what the others said, the new clean one supports a whole host of additional websites, is updated more regularly, and generally works better. I think my biggest issue with the clean one is that it's not on any of the add-on/extension stores, and it's unclear why it was removed from the add-on/extension store.
You can use this filter list in uBO as a workaround for the extension being off the add-on/extension store. https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-clean-filters/-/raw/main/bpc-paywall-filter.txt Comes with the added benefit of working on Firefox for Android until they open up the addons floodgate.