Getting around New York Times' article limit? Still possible
Contents on the New York Times website are protected by a paywall. What this means is that visitors get a certain contingent of free articles they can read in full before they receive a notification that they have reached the article limit for that month. To continue reading, visitors need to subscribe to the magazine to do so or find a way around the wall.
Just like any other form of protection on the Internet, the NYT's paywall has its holes that enable visitors to bypass the limitation. One of the easiest ones, removing a couple of characters in the address, has now been fixed by the company operating the website. It took the site operators two years to plug the hole. Why did it take so long? The most likely explanation is that there was no need to fix it. The operators likely know very well that there are ways to bypass the paywall, and that is probably fine with them as long as those options do not become mainstream.
Users who dedicated time and effort to read articles on the New York Times website for free are not likely to subscribe to the site if they are hit by the paywall. Regular readers on the other hand may not have the technical expertise to do the same thing, making it more likely that they will subscribe to the magazine to continue reading if there are not commonplace options available to circumvent the protection.
What the operators of the site need to make sure of is that methods that become too common can't be used to circumvent the protection.
As far as options to bypass the paywall go, there are still many that have not been closed yet. Firefox NoScript users for instance won't ever get the notification as it is triggered by JavaScript code which simply does not run when the add-on is active. In fact, they may never know that the New York Times website is limiting the articles on the site to visitors.
Other options may include clearing cookies or reading NYT articles in a browser's incognito mode.
For the technical inclined. The JavaScript file gwy.js seems to be responsible right now for all gateway activity. It is served from different addresses depending on where you are on the website.
Advertisement
Doesn’t Windows 8 know that www. or http:// are passe ?
Well it is a bit difficulty to distinguish between name.com domains and files for instance.
I know a service made by google that is similar to Google bookmarks.
http://www.google.com/saved
@Ashwin–Thankful you delighted my comment; who knows how many “gamers” would have disagreed!
@Martin
The comments section under this very article (3 comments) is identical to the comments section found under the following article:
https://www.ghacks.net/2023/08/15/netflix-is-testing-game-streaming-on-tvs-and-computers/
Not sure what the issue is, but have seen this issue under some other articles recently but did not report it back then.
Omg a badge!!!
Some tangible reward lmao.
It sucks that redditors are going to love the fuck out of it too.
With the cloud, there is no such thing as unlimited storage or privacy. Stop relying on these tech scums. Purchase your own hardware and develop your own solutions.
This is a certified reddit cringe moment. Hilarious how the article’s author tries to dress it up like it’s anything more than a png for doing the reddit corporation’s moderation work for free (or for bribes from companies and political groups)
Almost al unlmited services have a real limit.
And this comment is written on the dropbox article from August 25, 2023.
First comment > @ilev said on August 4, 2012 at 7:53 pm
For the God’s sake, fix the comments soon please! :[
Yes. Please. Fix the comments.
With Google Chrome, it’s only been 1,500 for some time now.
Anyone who wants to force me in such a way into buying something that I can get elsewhere for free will certainly never see a single dime from my side. I don’t even know how stupid their marketing department is to impose these limits on users instead of offering a valuable product to the paying faction. But they don’t. Even if you pay, you get something that is also available for free elsewhere.
The algorithm has also become less and less savvy in terms of e.g. English/German translations. It used to be that the bot could sort of sense what you were trying to say and put it into different colloquialisms, which was even fun because it was like, “I know what you’re trying to say here, how about…” Now it’s in parts too stupid to translate the simplest sentences correctly, and the suggestions it makes are at times as moronic as those made by Google Translations.
If this is a deep-learning AI that learns from users’ translations and the phrases they choose most often – which, by the way, is a valuable, moneys worthwhile contribution of every free user to this project: They invest their time and texts, thereby providing the necessary data for the AI to do the thing as nicely as they brag about it in the first place – alas, the more unprofessional users discovered the translator, the worse the language of this deep-learning bot has become, the greater the aggregate of linguistically illiterate users has become, and the worse the language of this deep-learning bot has become, as it now learns the drivel of every Tom, Dick and Harry out there, which is why I now get their Mickey Mouse language as suggestions: the inane language of people who can barely spell the alphabet, it seems.
And as a thank you for our time and effort in helping them and their AI learn, they’ve lowered the limit from what was once 5,000 to now 1,500…? A big “fuck off” from here for that! Not a brass farthing from me for this attitude and behaviour, not in a hundred years.