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

New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

open.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 175 posts

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#161

Post by davidw »

krapp wrote: post #159
davidw wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And once the race was no longer between two old guys, age ceased to matter much to a number of news outfits. If you look at old Trump interviews, from say 20 years ago, he has absolutely degraded, and not by a small amount.

>And once the race was no longer between two old guys, age ceased to matter much to a number of news outfits. Age never mattered with regards to Trump, but it was a meme with Biden even when he was VP. In terms of press coverage and popular perception it was never a race between two old guys, it was a race between "the old guy" and Trump.

And the press did a lot to shape that perception despite both showing signs of decline. That's the point. The coverage was skewed.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#162

Post by subjectsigma »

funcantor wrote: post #153
lordofgibbons wrote: post #31

NYTimes lost any and all credibility when they hired a literal Israeli Military Intelligence propagandist to write the their headline shock inducing piece on 40 beheaded babies, infants in ovens, and mass rape. These have all been widely been debunked, including by Israeli media. But NYT never retracted their propaganda piece. This gave a free hand for the IDF, with U.S backing, to commit mass murder on an industrial…

Why would you link to one of the most extreme mentally unwell twitter accounts immediately after a sentence on criticizing people willingness to consume propaganda?

Hmm, that account they posted is full of memes portraying China and communism in a good light, I wonder what their motivation could possibly be

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#163

Post by davidw »

allturtles wrote: post #71
davidw wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But once he was out of the race and there was only one old guy, age ceased to become an issue. That's what makes what they're doing kind of insidious. They're not making things up - Biden is indeed old. It's how they weight things and how much they push them. There's a reason the "NYT Pitch Bot" account is so popular - it's poking fun at a real phenomenon.

Are you claiming that the NYT is biased in favor of Trump? That's so hard to take seriously that I don't even know what to say to that.

I only know what I see.

Obviously the editorial page is not in favor of Trump.

The organization as a whole... IDK, I have a suspicion that they kind of view the chaos as good for business and exciting, rather than 'boring and dull' like Biden.

It's not a blatant bias, it's more subtle than that. It does not involve spreading falsehoods. More things like 'both sides!'.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#164

Post by infamouscow »

blitzar wrote: post #147
bee_rider wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The word of anonymous sources should be taken with a pretty big grain of salt, but they can point to verifiable information.

That is why the standard is two (or more) independent sources.

You should count the actual number of sources in an article, it's virtually always singular.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#165

Post by mmooss »

milesrout wrote: post #150
mmooss wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The conclusion of the research linked earlier in the thread is that the NYT covered it too much.

The mainstream media essentially didn't cover it at all until halfway through the election.

Who specifically do you mean by "mainstream media"?

In this discussion of the NY Times, they covered heavily and the Biden camp complained bitterly. Can you say when they started covering it?

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#166

Post by michaelt »

c22 wrote: post #92
michaelt wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think "about ten CIA employees were provided Times cover" was a way to funnel CIA info into the NYT - which, as you say, wouldn't need direct employment. It sounds more like CIA spies wanted to go poking around in foreign countries, interviewing people and photographing things, which being an NYT reporter allowed them to do.

But what does the NYT get out of it?

The journalists? Nothing, in fact it's a big negative.

The newspaper owners, though? The point of a newspaper is to obtain political power, both direct and through favours. The CIA was willing to overthrow a democratic government and replace it with a military dictatorship to help out a banana company - who wouldn't want to be owed favours like that?

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#167

Post by ZeroTalent »

agubelu wrote: post #148
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" https://archive.is is still the de-facto way to read NYT articles..." It's popular on HN for sure, but archive.is only works where the NYT article is archived Lighter weight, open source, local solutions like Bypass Paywalls Clean work on any NYT article regardless of whether archived archive.is may be blocked for some internet subscribers in some countries archive.is webpages are quite large and contain telemetry…

The fact that Bypass Paywalls Clean works for so many websites is kinda baffling to me. Are there any reasons why they choose to implement paywalls in front-end only, or is it just technical incompetence?

The people who bypass the paywall wouldn't pay anyway. It's just a marketing tactic. This + SEO.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#168

Post by notepad0x90 »

thinkingemote wrote: post #143
notepad0x90 wrote: post #86

Isn't it a paywalled service? How do people use it? they access it anonymously and then pay with a card?

First pay for the service (on non-tor system if the payments provider doesnt like Tor), then on Tor you can input your username and password like you would as normal. Tor doesn't stop people users voluntarily de-anonymising themselves for specific sites. It does stop curious entities on the network from seeing what people do.

that makes sense I guess, if you don't consider NYT themselves a potential threat actor that might nullify your anonymity.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#169

Post by lordofgibbons »

funcantor wrote: post #153
lordofgibbons wrote: post #31

NYTimes lost any and all credibility when they hired a literal Israeli Military Intelligence propagandist to write the their headline shock inducing piece on 40 beheaded babies, infants in ovens, and mass rape. These have all been widely been debunked, including by Israeli media. But NYT never retracted their propaganda piece. This gave a free hand for the IDF, with U.S backing, to commit mass murder on an industrial…

Why would you link to one of the most extreme mentally unwell twitter accounts immediately after a sentence on criticizing people willingness to consume propaganda?

Your unfounded ad hominem attacks aside, everything posted both there and on The Intercept are provably true. Interesting that you conveniently ignore the main issue here, which is the lack of integrity.
Post reply on HN