this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
1216 points (99.3% liked)

Memes

45657 readers
1892 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

You will go straight to jail 😡😡😡

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 26 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Doesn't NYT cut off most of the article now? I used to just be able to disable JS but that didn't work anymore last I checked.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

I use this extension and it lets me bypass pretty much every paywall including NYT's

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago

Best extension along with uBlock Origins!

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Warning. Russian orc website. Beware.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If you're afraid of visiting Russian websites, piracy is probably not for you.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Russian websites aren’t the problem. Software from Russian websites potentially is.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What a bullshit argument. Oh yes, untrusted software from random sites in any other top-level domain is safe.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Least racist corporate shill

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Yeah the article stub doesn't link to the article. It links to a login flow with the article id. If you go directly to the article you get redirected if you don't have a session.

It's incredibly easy to make an impossible to get around paywall. Porn has done it since the Internet existed.

In this very particular situation I'm glad most companies are lazy and stupid.

I don't particularly care if a company does pay only content. I think its legitimately ok. I hate companies that don't make you pay enough for the service to cover their costs thus leading to complete enshitifaction.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I thought the issue was they wanted search engines to be able to see the content, but not non paying viewers? Hence slightly shitty paywalls.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

Eh you're right of course. Like I said below. Search engines have become useless anyway..

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

It's incredibly easy to make an impossible to get around paywall.

Sure, but the easily-bypassed js method makes sure it’s still crawlable by search engines, which is a trade well worth making where I work. Doesn’t matter as much for porn sites since the title and description aren’t the content most people are there for, so you can expose them on the paywall page.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Very true. I don't disagree at all. I think once google finally becomes totally useless. It won't matter.

I mean Google is already just Yellow Pages AdWords edition with AI content

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe they have a way to unblock major search engine crawlers but block it for everyone else now? I know Cloudflare was doing something similar for some bot protection mechanism, and this seems like something news outlets would want to do also.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Brave browser has a filter to bypass paywalls. Works on desktop and mobile versions. Definitely works on NYT as I just read something there today. And of course has built in adblock. You can also add additional filters and adblock lists.

Bonus: print to PDF in Brave to share an article with someone else. It retains all the graphics relevant to the article and cuts all the junk and ads out too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

For that to work you have to use Brave browser. Ewwww. Firefox does the same with add-ons.