What do you mean? I was always under the impression that archives are for accessing a copy when the original is hard to access - this seems like the perfect use case.
Bypassing a paywall does sound a bit like piracy, if you think about it. This is what the commenter is referring to (tho in this case, I don't see a paywall on the article this end.)
Advertisements and web tracking feel like stalking. I’ll pay for content when the content providers respect my attention and privacy and not until then.
This isn't archive.org. Archive.is (and its many TLD equivalents) is explicitly for bypassing paywalls like this, and this is absolutely the intended use.
9 times out of ten it's because sites use cloaking and serve up all of the contents to search bots, but then paywall out end users, so it's kind of a hoisted by their own petard kind of situation.
And, I mean, people can choose to not follow those links. To the rest of us they're often very welcome, and we aren't subscribing to every random site for the once in a millennia worthwhile article.
The site existed for most of a decade before it had any particular paywall bypassing. It's an ondemand archival site that saves the DOM in such a way that redisplay is faithful, unlike archive.org.
It's a key resource in court cases for purely archival purposes and the fact that it bypasses paywalls is essential for its archival purpose to function.
When giant IP corporations violate IP, that's very different from Joe Rando watching a movie for free. It's way worse, on multiple levels, for rule-makers to break rules than for ordinary people to.
falcor84|20 days ago
PeterHolzwarth|20 days ago
chwtutha|20 days ago
46493168|20 days ago
Handprint4469|20 days ago
>> It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds.
>> In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html#:~:text=Are%20payw...
barnabee|20 days ago
piperswe|20 days ago
llm_nerd|20 days ago
9 times out of ten it's because sites use cloaking and serve up all of the contents to search bots, but then paywall out end users, so it's kind of a hoisted by their own petard kind of situation.
And, I mean, people can choose to not follow those links. To the rest of us they're often very welcome, and we aren't subscribing to every random site for the once in a millennia worthwhile article.
nullc|20 days ago
The site existed for most of a decade before it had any particular paywall bypassing. It's an ondemand archival site that saves the DOM in such a way that redisplay is faithful, unlike archive.org.
It's a key resource in court cases for purely archival purposes and the fact that it bypasses paywalls is essential for its archival purpose to function.
unknown|20 days ago
[deleted]
senko|20 days ago
t-3|20 days ago