This becomes a problem when several highly-ranked stories on the HN are links to sites I assume are behind paywalls, so I simply don't click on stories with from those domains. This is a sad state of affairs.
I realize that because they are charging for access to their stories they can probably create more and better content, but I will never be able to read them because, alas, I cannot access them, and I'm sure that there are a large number of people here in the same situation. Therefore, those stories do us no good because we cannot read them. If at all possible, find another source of the story (when possible) or find a free alternative to the content (also where possible). Perhaps if neither of those things exist, the story must go unshared.
So I ask you, the HN community and the admins here to not allow stories behind paywalls to get to the main page.
I see a lot of people complaining when NYT articles show up -- but they are often mistakenly thinking it's a paywall. It's not, it's just a free registration barrier. Even when the NYT goes metered in 2011, free members will still be allowed a certain amount of articles per month (similar to the Financial Times articles).
Moreover though, I'd like to point out that most newspapers are extremely affordable for students - almost every publication offers a generous student discount.
When I was a student I had subscriptions to the WSJ and Foreign Affairs because they were pretty cheap, WSJ was something like $15 for 3.75 months and Foreign Affairs was $20 for an entire year. NYTimes Student (M-F) is only $0.50 an issue. The Economist costs only $24 for 3.75 months... or $1.60 an issue. In almost all cases you end up saving between 70-80% when using the student subscriptions.
Plus you can keep subscribing at the same rates even after graduating -- you might have to fill in some bogus information about what course you are taking but it still works.
So, I don't know. I feel like the cost of student subscriptions isn't a whole lot and in that case maybe it's worth subscribing just to be well informed about the world. Certain pubs like the WSJ, FT, or Foreign Affairs will probably never be totally free and in that case, given the small fee they charge I'd be willing to trade eating pizza one day for ramen.
I tend to read a lot and it always bugs me to find out that magazines charge about 200-300% on top just for shipping it to EU countries. Also, there is nearly always no digital alternative - no WSJ on the Kindle in Europe, no Barrons in the EU, no digital student rebate for Foreign Affairs, huge shipping costs for Foreign Policy, Reason Magazine etc.
One thing I'll note is that often, if you subscribe to WSJ or Foreign Affairs they also throw in a online log in. Presumably, if your billing information is accepted you could have the print subscriptions mailed somewhere random while you use the online login information. But I've never tried it myself.
Maybe you're thinking of the NYT, where you register once for a free account (or just use a password from bugmenot.com)? Perhaps the WSJ, where the full text of everything is available from Google News?
Why not link to the Google News page instead, then?
Are you arguing that you have a moral right to consume, without limitation, the articles created by the New York Times, without any restrictions whatsoever?
If not, what's you're argument exactly? That the NY Times doesn't have the moral right to require registrations to access their content?
Personally, I love the Times, and I'd be willing to pay for access, if it came to that. I'm happy that they've been able to find a business model that does not require me to pay, and my registering for the site is an insignificant price to pay.
I read (or click through) to most everything that hits the front page and never hit paywalls, except for academic journals.
As annoying as it is to be blocked by a paywall, I don't think that's a valid criteria for censorship. Good content is good content, and often the comments on HN are worth more than the article itself.
You're a poor college student. I sympathize: I was once a poor college student. I am no longer a poor college student. Most of us here are not poor college students. Many of us run profitable businesses. Some pay amounts which would stagger your imagination for "content" (scare quotes because I don't really like that word). Content is, ahem, not a commodity -- the existence of free "content" doesn't compete with the stuff I care about any more than the existence of free food competes with those very ritzy Chicago restaurants Thomas likes.
I think that's a bad assumption. I read the top stories quite regularly, and I haven't come across a paywall in a very long time.
2. The only time I have seen a similar complaint is when nytimes links are posted. But those stories are not behind a paywall. The registration is free.
A request to anyone complaining about stories on frontpage. Please post links to stories unless they are glaringly obvious (like the wave of iPad articles). I don't remember coming across any paywall. So if there are links to the stories it helps to actually understand what the OP is complaining about.
Example is the NYT apparently re-introducing paywalls in 2011, at least according to this NPR story: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1227770...
Here is a blog post about the economics of the NYT paywall: http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/01/20/the-economi...
I haven't heard about this for a while, and it looks like the posts I found are from the beginning of this year. Does anyone know if the NYT is still doing this? I hope not...