Hacker News Reader

Comment by ErikAugust | Hacker News Reader

Feel free to use Trim to remove all paywalls and JavaScript from places like the New York Times: https://beta.trimread.com.

View on HN

How is this not theft?

Journalism is expensive. Of course, there are other business models (full disclosure, we're building one too: https://blog.nillium.com/what-can-napster-teach-local-news/) but circumventing a paywall is not the answer.

Yes, the NYT is one of the few outlets that is doing reasonably well right now. But many newspapers are going out of business, or at least furloughing employees -- employees who already were not earning huge salaries.

If you read the article, and they ask for money to let you do that -- then honor that request. Just because you can hop over a paywall doesnt mean you should.

Loading a page and choosing not to run the code they ship with it is not theft.

Evading a paywall is.

Really? What have they lost in this theft? The electricity needed to run the server serving the request?

You don't deserve the downvotes. Just because the technical measures used to protect the content are weak doesn't grant you the right to circumvent it. Hacker-types always seem have this fallacy of "if I can do it, I'm allowed to do it. I understand it -- we're all hackers because we get joy out of breaking technical locks and using things for purposes they weren't intended and rule-layering digital systems. But just because someone uses a cheap lock it doesn't mean you have the right to break it.

Who even cares about the copyright violation vs theft distinction at this point? They're offering access to their content for a price, they're not bothering with draconian DRM and so it's a dick move to just take it.

Do you have some kind of obligation to read the advertisement sections of a newspaper that gets delivered to your home for free?

Do you have the right to modify your on-prem installation of Gitlab to enable Enterprise features you're not paying for?

> How is this not theft?

I call it peaceful protest.

How about buying a subscription to not just NYT or other national outlets, but local news organizations so the people reporting on these issues can keep the lights on.

I've gotten the impression it'd cost like $100 / month to subscribe to the different newspapers whose articles I read maybe once a month?

But if there was a way to subscribe to all of them and pay $1 per article

(But I'd like to use Trim for 2 years, for Nyt.)

How many newspapers would you realistic subscribe to? If you're reading the NYT, LAT, WAPO, WSJ, FT, then yes, the subscriptions add up.

If the newspapers/sites expect every reader to subscribe, it can add up quickly, if you're reading 2 articles in each of 20 publications every month.

I do wish more people would pay for content, but the market hasn't really adjusted to the way people read 1% of dozens of different publications.

Yes, and I find it a bit weird that the newspapers won't collaborate and do sth about this -- I wonder how much money they're missing out on.

@catacombs -- those, + the economist, + 3? more in my home country

Most of all I'd like to support small local newspapers

> Yes, and I find it a bit weird that the newspapers won't collaborate and do sth about this -- I wonder how much money they're missing out on.

Way easier said than done.

The NYT in this case should never be supported again.

Scott Alexander does important journalistic work in deeply analyzing the issues.

It’s worth noting that the story is about how he was right about coronavirus in ways that the NYT was not.

The NYT is knowingly attacking his livelyhood and person by exposing him in this way.

I slightly wonder if they wanted to get rid of him? (his blog)

One Scott Alexander is no threat to them, but 10 could be, and this is clearly going to produce a chilling effect.

Edit for clarification:

I mean 10 commentators with his level of diligence who are willing to engage with difficult issues without ignoring the complexity.

We desperately need more of that in our society, and this action by the NYT will have a chilling effect.

It is profoundly wrong and antidemocratic.

What do you mean 10 could be? Ten copies of SSC? That wouldn't work.

EDIT: Thanks for the clarification, zepto. I see your point now.

I mentioned this in another reply, but do you honestly think an obscure blog as SSC is a genuine threat to the NYT?

SSC is a highly influential analytical blog, NYT is fast becoming a fact free propaganda horn.

They're bound to clash.

> ...NYT is fast becoming a fact free propaganda horn.

The Trump Curse in action! "Fake News Media", indeed.

I've considered NYT a propaganda rag ever since they marketed the attack on Iraq. Just because Trump is saying something does not mean it is false - a large part of how he gained such a following is from tapping into a lot of real frustrations that people have. Consolidated mainstream media in the US is the equivalent of state media in the USSR - they're both mouthpieces of the ruling power structure. The US just airs competing factions which creates an illusion of vibrancy.

(disclaimer: Please don't take this as some endorsement of Trump. Even though some of his claims are right, he apparently isn't so much opposed to that corruption as an outsider looking into get in on the action. Also after being elected, most presidents tone down the divisive pandering)

> ..he apparently isn't so much opposed to that corruption as an outsider looking into get in on the action. Also after being elected, most presidents tone down the divisive pandering

Agreed, of course.

> Just because Trump is saying something does not mean it is false - a large part of how he gained such a following is from tapping into a lot of real frustrations that people have.

Contrary: A majority of his statements have been proven false.

> The NYT is knowingly attacking his livelyhood and person by exposing him in this way.

You have no evidence to back up this claim.

Yes, the fact SSC was fast to publish information about the coronavirus than other organizations. But, do you really think the NYT, a behemoth in the media world, considers an obscure blog -- to many -- a threat?

I think the NYT considers the obscure blog a snack.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com