EDIT: Downvotes could mean many things. The next person planning on hitting the downvote button, could you spare for me a brief reply letting me know why?
EDIT2: Ugh, now I'm the "downvote edit guy." Obviously irrelevant now, but I don't want to remove the first edit and screw over people saying "I downvoted you because x," so, apologies for violating guidelines and making this mess.
Fighting copyright monopolies is hard enough without adding Stockholm syndrome to the mix.
Or, I am curious why the OP is willing to take this risk for us.
Really, though, I am just curious if I would get in trouble for doing the same down the line ;)
Why are you fighting copyright monopolies? You are doing free work for the any-copyright industry.
edit: ok, that's not true. the MPAA/RIAA advertisements do equate piracy with violent crime.
Good journalism boosts the quality of civic life. Journalism funded solely by advertising has a poor record. So we're left with public funding à la the BBC, or the patronage of billionaires, thereby sacrificing the Fourth Estate's independence; or subscriptions. The latter requires a solution to the free rider problem [1]. Paywalls, and the copyrights defending them, are one such solution.
I consume news from subscription sources (e.g. the Wall Street Journal and the Information), advertising-back sources (e.g. Politico) and subsidized sources (e.g. the BBC and Bloomberg). I benefit from that reading, as does, I believe, the greater society I live in. I think it's fair and rational to fight for said journalists' compensation.
It's not "Stockholm syndrome" it's being decent and respectful of other people's effort and work.
However, correct me if I'm wrong, reprinting wholesale a journal's article is a copyright crime in the USA, is it not? Or I guess it constitutes fair use somehow?
As a submitter doing a workaround, I'd much rather find a legit link to a non-paywalled version of the article, instead of copying content.
While I understand your argument and why you make it I disagree vehemently and therefore I downvoted you. I believe that either HNers should circumvent the paywall and the content owners will likely benefit from the upvote in exposure for this who can afford/want to pay for it, or otherwise WSJ, NYT and others should be banned from HN.
As is complaining about both paywalls and ads. That said, posting the full text isn't a workaround.