this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)

InternetIsBeautiful

3403 readers
1 users here now

A place for your preferably unique useful or fun sites and kind of a bookmark manager for me :p

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I hate paywalls as much as anyone, but I've been thinking lately... how can we expect to fund quality journalism without paying for any news? Is it viable to rely on donations alone?

[–] flubo@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

I agree and still don't have a solution. I read a lot of news and I like to read different views on the same topic, like reading a very leftish and a very conservative article. But I just cant pay all of them. :/

My idea was to pay two different newspapers (one for daily news the other a monthly magazine) so that I pay at least some journalists and read the rest for free. And then change whom I am paying every year or two. For this I need antipaywall to still read the rest....

Now with some friends we have subscriptions to different newspapers and share them, but usually u have a fixed amount of devices you can connect to one subscription so more than 3 newspapers is difficult already.

I really liked this flattr idea but I think it died. It was something like you give an amount of money every month to your flattr account and then when you read articles and you liked them you press the flattr button.l at the end of the article. At the end of the month flatttr would distribute your money among all sites that you clicked the bottom with the amount corresponding to how many articles you liked... very good idea. But died(?) with paywalls.

[–] mayo@lemmy.today 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This doesn't work nearly as well as it did in the past. I don't know the story behind 12ft, but they seem to be complying with any site which has requested it to not work on their articles.

[–] Anekdoteles@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Never worked well for me, tbh. I always went with archive.org which doesn't work anymore as well. The publishers have won the internet.

[–] federalreverse@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

Bloomberg blocks the service entirely, as does NY Times. :/

[–] schwim@reddthat.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's no longer a reliable solution. Most paywalls now just throw a javascript confirmation at it's IP that breaks the ability to display the article.

[–] DougHolland@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And worse, 12-Foot Ladder intentionally doesn't work on many newspaper sites. Maybe they got some cease-and-desist letters, but for bypassing paper paywalls it's often useless.

[–] Firnin@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

I read somewhere that they work together with some companies and disabled their service in those news sites. But whether this co-op has monetary gains for 12ft or is the result from cease and desist orders, that I don't know

[–] wyrmroot@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Looks interesting. Let’s paste in a NY Times article that I couldn’t read earlier.

12ft has been disabled for this site

…neat

[–] Rocketpoweredgorilla@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] hillbicks@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

With the recent changes to chrome, you really should give Firefox a chance though.

[–] RogueBanana@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's just the url, the extension is available for both chrome and firefox and they already said they are on firefox

[–] hillbicks@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I just saw chrome in the url and overlooked the Firefox part in the actual sentence :D

[–] Rocketpoweredgorilla@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think you're replying to the wrong person? I've been using firefox since it was called netscape navigator, aside from a stint in the 00's

Edit: Oh do you mean the link? I'm on firefox the "chrome" in the link is just the url, it takes you to the install for both firefox and chrome. I assume the plugin was probably made for chrome first then ported to firefox.

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They definitely just missed the “on Firefox”, but you definitely made that clear hahaha

[–] Rocketpoweredgorilla@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I thought so ... but there's times my brain doesn't always parse what I read properly either lol

[–] hillbicks@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

Thanks for going easy on me. :p

Yes, that was a total brain fart on my part, I just looked at the url.