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

You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

mcsweeneys.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 108 posts

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#51

Post by sunshowers »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #47
bqmjjx0kac wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason the trailing dot works is that it represents the implicit root DNS node. Browsers do the dumb thing and consider it a different domain, but AFAIK there's no good reason not to canonicalize the domain name. All that to say, no, you sadly can't add another trailing dot.

> Browsers do the dumb thing I could use more browser dumb things like this. Like when the browser won't ever forget that you once visited an HSTS server at this domain and now+forever won't let you visit the http server (at the same domain).

There's a string you can type in blind that bypasses HSTS. Works on Chromium browsers. I don't want to make to too easy to find so I won't say it here but you can look for it.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#52

Post by doubloon »

akira2501 wrote: post #33
remoquete wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quality journalism, and, even more importantly, free journalism (as in neutral or unbiased), costs money. I think a subscription is a very low effort compared to the kind of risks and hard work top reporters go through. Another angle: prose and code describe facts using slightly different languages, but would you say that code (or institutions capable of publishing code at scale) shouldn't exist or that they should "…

Journalism does not cost money. Running a company that is attempting to profit off of publishing costs money. Or have you never read anything produced at no benefit to the author that has ever informed you? I think you're putting the cart before the horse, and advertising supported journalism has always existed, and these companies would rather collect CPM from google than do legitimate placement of ads in their own…

the difference between new york times and a independent creator journalism is that the NYT can fund a huge legal department to defend free speech inside the court system. Its why the major free speech cases like NYT v Sullivan have the NYT in the name.

There is never, ever going to be an equivalent case with big tech ("Google V Sullivan") because Google does care what happens to youtube creators, and they are not liable because thanks to section 230 they are not a publisher. Google do not care if any youtuber get sued out of existence by the government or the powerful. Same for Wikipedia, Wikipedia is never going to be involved in a major free speech case because thanks to section 230 they have no legal liability for what others post on their site. Same for Facebook, Twitch, Twitter, all of them. Big Tech media has absolutely zero protections for any of the journalism done on them.

That is why big cases like Weinstein are still done by the NYT and The New Yorker.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#53

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

lxgr wrote: post #48
akira2501 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalism does not cost money. Running a company that is attempting to profit off of publishing costs money. Or have you never read anything produced at no benefit to the author that has ever informed you? I think you're putting the cart before the horse, and advertising supported journalism has always existed, and these companies would rather collect CPM from google than do legitimate placement of ads in their own…

Of course journalism costs money. Sometimes it’s just not directly paid (most commonly: ad-supported journalism), or even paid for by the journalist with their time and opportunity cost of not selling it to somebody that does charge for it (blogs etc.) If none of these are applicable, chances are it’s PR, not journalism.

> Of course journalism costs money.

Absolutely. Journalism takes time. Good journalism takes a lot of time.

I would agree that it takes very little time to parrot LEO/Gov/Corp press releases.

It takes much more time to vet that PR for accuracy, truthfulness and historical context - and then chase down all the rabbit holes that get turned up and compile enough info to craft an understandable story.

It does suck that the first option gets chosen like 100-1 over the 2nd.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#54

Post by cortesoft »

jonhohle wrote: post #43
bqmjjx0kac wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason the trailing dot works is that it represents the implicit root DNS node. Browsers do the dumb thing and consider it a different domain, but AFAIK there's no good reason not to canonicalize the domain name. All that to say, no, you sadly can't add another trailing dot.

I had never thought about having a local search domain so something like google.com.mynetwork. would resolve (the tailing dot prevents search domain lookups). Would a browser allow that internal site to access google.com cookies (since the lookup would be for google.com, no trailing dot). I suppose that would only work for unsecured traffic anyway so maybe not a huge attack vector. Edit to add: if you have web servic…

That wouldn't work because Google would not return the proper content, since the host header would not match google.com. HTTPS would not work either, like you said, because the cert would not match the new domain.

If they didn't check host headers, then no, the browser would not send the cookies for google.com, since the browser has no idea about your DNS changes and is only looking at the domain name itself.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#55

Post by p3rls »

itsoktocry wrote: post #4
ReadCarlBarks wrote: post #2

Most sites use simple cookies or a localStorage entry to limit how many articles you can read in a month. You can bypass this with a private tab or by disabling JavaScript with uBlock Origin: * https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/open-in-temp-container/ * https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Per-site-switches#no-... * https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode:-medium...

I mean, yeah? This entirely misses the point of the article. In fact, it couldn't have been a worse shot. I don't know enough about the economics of this stuff, but I'm willing to pay for good online writing. I have a national paper subscription, two magazines and a handful of substacks I subscribe to. But this feel like a price point issue for me. Why is everything $9.99/month (close to $15/month CAD)? Where are all…

I chose to go with a $3 subscription model myself, at that cheap it's just a waste of time to go through the unsub process. Cha Ching.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#56

Post by notRobot »

yegle wrote: post #34

I was a happy user of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Contributor until it got shutdown. The pricing was surprisingly low, $5/month can eliminate ads on most of the websites that I view, while the owner will not have a reduced ads revenue.

I never knew that was a thing! Of course they killed it. I wish they still had it. I would definitely subscribe.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#57

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

bqmjjx0kac wrote: post #40
rightbyte wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is usually better to read about stuff like months later when the dust have settled. Watching CNN lazer focus on some "developing story" with almost nothing to talk about but gossip makes my head hurt. If the local bridge is closed due to X people tell you.

Have you found a good place to read about slightly less current events? I feel like most articles are little salami slices of events as they occur, without context.

Wikipedia has a few spread over several countries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_journalism#Slow_journalis...

Techdirt does analysis https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=techdirt.com

Prospect Magazine does yesterday's journalism https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/

RetroReport does event postmortem videos https://retroreport.org/

For particularly brilliant writers (ex: https://duck.com/?q=Kashmir+Hill https://duck.com/?q=Zeynep+Tufekci), I'll see where else they're writing. Sometimes that turns up mags I don't know about.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#58

Post by cortesoft »

sunshowers wrote: post #51
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Browsers do the dumb thing I could use more browser dumb things like this. Like when the browser won't ever forget that you once visited an HSTS server at this domain and now+forever won't let you visit the http server (at the same domain).

There's a string you can type in blind that bypasses HSTS. Works on Chromium browsers. I don't want to make to too easy to find so I won't say it here but you can look for it.

You really think HN readers can't find the interstitial bypass keyword? It shows up in the very first Google search for it, I am not sure who you think you are protecting.

I also find it goes against the ethos of HN to try to prevent a user from controlling their own hardware... if I want to MITM myself, I should be able to.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#59

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

ReadCarlBarks wrote: post #2

Most sites use simple cookies or a localStorage entry to limit how many articles you can read in a month. You can bypass this with a private tab or by disabling JavaScript with uBlock Origin: * https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/open-in-temp-container/ * https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Per-site-switches#no-... * https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Blocking-mode:-medium...

One can also disable Javascript for individual sites ("site settings").

Or use a client that does not implement cookies, localStorage or Javascript, like the original www browsers. I have been using these for decades.

In the relatively rare case I have to use a popular, graphical browser distributed by an entity that collects users' data to support online ad services, on a network I do not control, I use Javascript site settings and/or UBlock Origin. But that is far more complicated, more resource intensive and slower compared to using a simpler client and a localhost-bound forward proxy. Plus I am at the mercy of third parties: 1. the advertising-supported company distributing the browser and 2. the "browser extension" developer.

Re: You've Read Your Last Free Article, Such Is the Nature of Mortality

#60

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

sunshowers wrote: post #51
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Browsers do the dumb thing I could use more browser dumb things like this. Like when the browser won't ever forget that you once visited an HSTS server at this domain and now+forever won't let you visit the http server (at the same domain).

There's a string you can type in blind that bypasses HSTS. Works on Chromium browsers. I don't want to make to too easy to find so I won't say it here but you can look for it.

> Works on Chromium browsers.

Saw that a few days ago but I don't do Chromium browsers. Cest la vie.

Appreciate the attempt.

Post reply on HN