The Price We Pay for Sitting Too Much | Hacker News Reader

The Price We Pay for Sitting Too Much

wsj.com

8 pointsprostoalex11 comments

About the actual article though (thanks for the tips that allowed me to view it even though it was jumping through hoops): These sit/stand articles are starting to drive me crazy. I bit the bullet and spent $500 on a convertible sit/stand rig for my desk. I try to split the difference sitting in the mornings and standing after lunch. This article, however, suggests that I sit for 20 minutes, stand for 8, and do something for 2, every 30 minutes?! How the heck am I supposed to get any actual concentration done in a day?!

Can we stop posting WSJ until the paywall comes down? I know there are work arounds but it's useless to me to click this article and realize I need to do the ol' "Come From Google" trick.

I agree pay for content on hackernews is very prohibitive and distracting.

It's one or four clicks to see the article:

1. Click the link. If you are a signed in WSJ subscriber, you see it. If you are not a subscriber, there is a chance you'll still get the full article.

2. If that doesn't work you click back to HN.

3. Then you can click the "web" link under the title on HN. That does a Google search for the article title.

4. Click the link on the first search result.

Are you really so busy, important, and/or lazy that sometimes doing three more clicks is such an inordinate burden on you that you think all of us should give up on a frequent source of good articles?

The real value of HN is usually more in the discussion than in the submitted article itself. There are usually enough HN readers who subscribe, or who have the strong constitutions and intestinal fortitude needed to click four times [1], to bootstrap a discussion that even those who have not read the article can follow, participate in, enjoy, and profit from. As a recent example, see the discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10832352

Personally, I have found that about 80% of the time after I read the comments (which I generally read first) I don't feel the need to even try to read the submitted article. Especially if the discussion has drawn comments from some of the top HN commentators, such as tptacek, patio11, jacquesm, rayiner, ChuckMcM, and many others.

[1] so much for my New Year's resolution to be less sarcastic online...

This came up before and dang's suggestion was to focus on quality content.

Paywalls are inconsistent, and between cookie policies, country restrictions, per-article restrictions, personal or corporate subscriptions it's hard to say what percentage of readership has access to it.

I believe it's also a self-solving problem, as a story behind a very restrictive paywall won't get upvoted (e.g. you don't see many ft.com or nature.com stories on HN).

This is answered here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989. If the paywall has a standard workaround, then it's ok for HN. It's not a great situation but it's better than the alternative.

Subthreads like this one, which are always the same, are off topic.

Flagging WSJ, NYT, etc. articles merely for being behind paywalls is an abuse of flagging.

Link without login needed: http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-price-we-pay-for-sitting-too...

That link still requires login.

Or, just search for article title and go to it via Google. It seems to work every time. Learned that via Chris Gammell from the Amp Hour[].

[] - http://www.theamphour.com/

Or click the "web" link under the title.

Never noticed that. Brilliant addition!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com