Because paywalls are trivial to bypass and it's exhausting hearing people constantly complain about them. The GP in this thread has been on HN for 10 years. They should know how to bypass it by now. Hell, four minutes after they posted someone posted the bypassed link.
> In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic.
Not when some of us are in facilities with locked-down browsers with very strict CMMC requirements. That bypass doesn't get to exist for us.
The answer, plain and simple for any 5-year-old to see, is QUIT LINKING PAYWALLED ARTICLES. You want us to talk about something? We'd damn-well better be able to actually READ it so we can have an intelligent conversation about it.
Failing to do show shows 100% disingenuity in wanting to have an open conversation.
> The answer, plain and simple for any 5-year-old to see, is
Read it later. If you can't read it at work, you can read it on your phone or after work from another computer.
Also, the guidelines and FAQ are both easy to read, and shouldn't be blocked by any CMMC nonsense at your office if HN itself isn't blocked. This one is a useful guideline for people like you, whose shouting makes you seem like a crazy uncle sending emails from your AOL account:
> Please don't use uppercase for emphasis. Instead, put *asterisks* around it and it will get italicized.
"Read it later. If you can't read it at work, you can read it on your phone or after work from another computer."
Negative, as I have ZERO TIME when working with things involving security.
"Please don't use uppercase for emphasis. Instead, put asterisks around it and it will get italicized."
Yea, no. See your asterisks didn't italicize. I'm looking at your comment right now, with screencap in clipboard buffer if you need a pasted proof of this formatting not working - https://imgur.com/a/7TzQOKw - No italics there. Unless the > at the beginning indicates (stupidly) to ignore formatting rules placed after it, your comment has zero formatting outside of regular spacing.
But you see, I was already aware that function didn't work reliably. Which is why I will continue to use caps for emphasis as it's guaranteed to work.
https://archive.is/w6xmO
Interesting. The water they speak of is also known as "primary water", which is a controversial term.
So it might be that life started inside rocks (with tiny amounts of water) deep underground and not in the water on the surface.
In case anyone wonders over the low vote count, for me just now, the link only briefly shows the article before swapping it for a paywall.
Strange. It is working for me without pay wall.
No adblocker
Maybe some random or cookies thing?
just use ublock or noscript (why does that even have to be said on HN?)
https://github.com/liamengland1/miscfilters
it's a fascinating story worth reading
I actually find your comment very useful and therefore upvoted it.
Careful. The last time I mentioned this issue I got told off for it!!!
Really? I'm curious as to why
Because paywalls are trivial to bypass and it's exhausting hearing people constantly complain about them. The GP in this thread has been on HN for 10 years. They should know how to bypass it by now. Hell, four minutes after they posted someone posted the bypassed link.
The FAQ even addresses it:
> In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic.
"Because paywalls are trivial to bypass"
Not when some of us are in facilities with locked-down browsers with very strict CMMC requirements. That bypass doesn't get to exist for us.
The answer, plain and simple for any 5-year-old to see, is QUIT LINKING PAYWALLED ARTICLES. You want us to talk about something? We'd damn-well better be able to actually READ it so we can have an intelligent conversation about it.
Failing to do show shows 100% disingenuity in wanting to have an open conversation.
> The answer, plain and simple for any 5-year-old to see, is
Read it later. If you can't read it at work, you can read it on your phone or after work from another computer.
Also, the guidelines and FAQ are both easy to read, and shouldn't be blocked by any CMMC nonsense at your office if HN itself isn't blocked. This one is a useful guideline for people like you, whose shouting makes you seem like a crazy uncle sending emails from your AOL account:
> Please don't use uppercase for emphasis. Instead, put *asterisks* around it and it will get italicized.
"Read it later. If you can't read it at work, you can read it on your phone or after work from another computer."
Negative, as I have ZERO TIME when working with things involving security.
"Please don't use uppercase for emphasis. Instead, put asterisks around it and it will get italicized."
Yea, no. See your asterisks didn't italicize. I'm looking at your comment right now, with screencap in clipboard buffer if you need a pasted proof of this formatting not working - https://imgur.com/a/7TzQOKw - No italics there. Unless the > at the beginning indicates (stupidly) to ignore formatting rules placed after it, your comment has zero formatting outside of regular spacing.
But you see, I was already aware that function didn't work reliably. Which is why I will continue to use caps for emphasis as it's guaranteed to work.
You *can* escape *asterisks*.