You will go straight to jail 😡😡😡

  • sudoer777@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Doesn’t NYT cut off most of the article now? I used to just be able to disable JS but that didn’t work anymore last I checked.

    • Polysics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Brave browser has a filter to bypass paywalls. Works on desktop and mobile versions. Definitely works on NYT as I just read something there today. And of course has built in adblock. You can also add additional filters and adblock lists.

      Bonus: print to PDF in Brave to share an article with someone else. It retains all the graphics relevant to the article and cuts all the junk and ads out too.

    • xenoclast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Yeah the article stub doesn’t link to the article. It links to a login flow with the article id. If you go directly to the article you get redirected if you don’t have a session.

      It’s incredibly easy to make an impossible to get around paywall. Porn has done it since the Internet existed.

      In this very particular situation I’m glad most companies are lazy and stupid.

      I don’t particularly care if a company does pay only content. I think its legitimately ok. I hate companies that don’t make you pay enough for the service to cover their costs thus leading to complete enshitifaction.

      • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        It’s incredibly easy to make an impossible to get around paywall.

        Sure, but the easily-bypassed js method makes sure it’s still crawlable by search engines, which is a trade well worth making where I work. Doesn’t matter as much for porn sites since the title and description aren’t the content most people are there for, so you can expose them on the paywall page.

        • xenoclast@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Very true. I don’t disagree at all. I think once google finally becomes totally useless. It won’t matter.

          I mean Google is already just Yellow Pages AdWords edition with AI content

      • ChuckEffingNorris@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I thought the issue was they wanted search engines to be able to see the content, but not non paying viewers? Hence slightly shitty paywalls.