[stanac]

"Sign up for free access to this post".

There should be a rule about this kind of posts. If there isn't already.

https://archive.ph/1YRCE

[sarreph]

> If there isn't already.

There is![0]

[0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989

[mirashii]

Importantly, in that rule:

> Complaints about paywalls are off topic, so please don't post them.

[MisterTea]

Which is ironic because if you cant read the article, how can you have a discussion?

[cheshire_cat]

By that logic links to the FT and the WaPo also couldn't be posted. Which I guess is a fair position to take, but seems too limiting to me.

[dminik]

What meaningful conversation can you have about an article you can read beyond the headline?

[dylan604]

Just because you don't have access doesn't mean that people with access should be disallowed from discussing it. It just means you can't really discuss the article, but that's never stopped anyone from commenting before

[rustystump]

Sadly, knowing most people, headline is rarely read past even when it isnt paywalled

[functionmouse]

> seems too limiting to me.

articles restricting most users from reading them seems too limiting

ban all sites with paywalls/login walls including Twitter, NYT, FT, Business Insider, literally all of them

[nosioptar]

For anyone who doesnt know: changing the x.com or twitter.com in a twitter link to xcancel.com usually works to view tweets without an account.

(If I remember right, some video links dont always work with xcancel.)

[airstrike]

WSJ and Bloomberg offer "gift links" that paid users can share. The latter is only good for 7 days IIRC, however.

[imglorp]

Seems pretty easy to have a bot automatically try to create an archive link and comment it.

[Forgeties79]

There are plenty of posts every day that don’t require you to get through a paywall - I personally just ignore them. I imagine there are only a handful of paywalled articles a week, and most of them end up having an archive link in the comments anyway

[incanus77]

Ok, anyone care to gather at a coffee shop so that we can discuss the print version?

[ssl-3]

You guys haven't been going to the meetings?

[apparent]

No, my horse broke down so I've been stuck at the farm.

[ssl-3]

No worries, comrade.

I've gone ahead and moved this week's meeting, which happens to be tonight, to your place.

We'll be there soon.

[davidwritesbugs]

You have a /horse/?! Well laadeedaa

[cyanydeez]

Someone should point their LLM at creating a web plugin that just overlays a comment section & wiki style editing for archive and other similar websites. Then we can do the same thing LLMs are doing to invalidate primary sources.

[gessha]

It’s the same as posting paywalls articles. There’s no need to make a new rule. If the users can’t read it, the conversation will simply devolve into title commenting.