HN Explorer

17 comments

[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 43.8 ms ] thread
dev1n
google link to bypass paywall [1]

[1]:https://www.google.com/#q=http:%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%...

Mithaldu
I honestly like that its paywalled. If it were important it wouldn't be. Saves time.
EwanG
Which takes me to a google search page with the article as the top link, and when I click it I still get the paywall. Something I'm missing?
dev1n
That's odd. The idea is that WSJ allows non-paywalled referrals from google so I figured posting the link to the google search would help. Sorry about that. I don't know why it's still paywalled for you..
leohutson
Try opening the Google link in incognito. Or don't, it's not really worth the effort to read such a biased piece.
icpmacdo
incognito and whitelist WSJ from ad blockers
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
jedberg
Only if your IP hasn't hit it already. They switched from cookie to IP based tracking (or some combo at least).
wcummings
>It’s up to Congress to block a surrender that could give control to authoritarian rulers.

Oh, the irony!

dublinben
If you know anything about the farce that is the UN Human Rights Council[0], the idea of some international coalition of governments having any control over the fundamental infrastructure of the internet should be concerning. All things considered, the IANA has been in good hands under the purview of ICANN and the US Department of Commerce.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Co...

daveloyall
I don't really follow ICANN news. I have some vague idea that they've made some questionable moves over the past several years.

I know nothing of the Obama administration's involvement.

Could somebody translate the article into a form I understand? ICANN manages the sale/assignment of IP addresses and manages the Root DNS Servers, right?

How does USA currently control them and what does the proposed change mean?