allow me to be a bit snarky - you're on HACKER News, if a paywall is too much for you to get around then the hacker spirit seems to be missing a bit ;)
It's been an hour since your first question. Instead of griping about an answer you waited an hour for, maybe go look at HN's FAQ (ya know, the one linked at the bottom of every page)?
It addresses that directly, and includes a link to a plethora of comments from dang, a mod, about it. They allow paywalls, because the rule is usually to post the original source, rather than an article discussing another article, and often times those original sources are high quality content behind paywalls. Hence why they allow workarounds, which also take about 5-10 seconds to get around at archive.is. If you're still not satisfied by this, again, go read the numerous comments from dang about it to get a better understanding.
Why do you think I didn't read the QA? Why are you being so passive aggressive?
I was trying to start a conversation, about a topic I feel is very relevant to the quality of HN, but apparently seething and coping and just being nasty online to try shut down conversation is an OK thing for you to do.
Because the FAQ explicitly says not to complain about paywalls, and that's what your comment is doing. You also asked why HN allows them, and the FAQ, as I said, clearly points to a large number of times dang has explained why they are allowed.
• A large fraction of the comments on many (maybe even most) stories here are discussing points that are not actually from the submitted story. They are on points that arose in the comments. Those points may have been originally mentioned in the comments in response to something in the story but take on a life of their own. There is generally no need to have read the story to understand and participate intelligently in those subthreads.
• Usually enough of the commenters who did read the story quote enough of it in their comments that even on those subthreads that have not veered off on some interesting tangent inspired by not covered in the story you can often follow and even meaningfully contribute.
• For submissions that are covering news items there will usually be other sources covering it too. They may not be as thorough as the submitted paywalled site, but usually a quick search with your favorite search engine will turn up enough to let you follow and participate even in those subthreads where no one is quoting enough of the submissions.
• For submissions that are not covering news items and so might not have any other good sources and where no interesting tangents have developed in the comments and no one is quoting enough to help, you can still often tell from the comments whether or not the story is something that interests you. That knowledge can be useful even if you cannot find a free way to access it now.
• If none of the above apply to you it's easy to look at the domain and skip submissions from sites you recognize as having paywalls. It's almost trivial to write a bookmarklet to do that for you if you want to make it even easier.
> 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. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic². More here³.
I wonder if the size and rotation of this thing is substantial enough to produce a gyroscopic effect that impacts the earth's rotation or tilt in some way.
"Yes" but with a teeny tiny delta that would challenge measurement and specific attribution. Also lost in noise of other chunks doing their thing and the circulation forces in the larger climatic cells that tile the globe.
More generally large amounts of mass, in cubic kilometres of ice moving off the Antarctic landmass will have a more noticeable effect, the landmass will lift upwards and the global distribution of mass will change.
There are papers on this, it's a search-fu challenge to find a few.
19 comments
[ 2.3 ms ] story [ 70.8 ms ] threadhere's the full article: https://web.archive.org/web/20240808114921/https://www.nytim...
It addresses that directly, and includes a link to a plethora of comments from dang, a mod, about it. They allow paywalls, because the rule is usually to post the original source, rather than an article discussing another article, and often times those original sources are high quality content behind paywalls. Hence why they allow workarounds, which also take about 5-10 seconds to get around at archive.is. If you're still not satisfied by this, again, go read the numerous comments from dang about it to get a better understanding.
You're welcome.
I was trying to start a conversation, about a topic I feel is very relevant to the quality of HN, but apparently seething and coping and just being nasty online to try shut down conversation is an OK thing for you to do.
"you're welcome".
>Why do you think I didn't read the QA?
Because the FAQ explicitly says not to complain about paywalls, and that's what your comment is doing. You also asked why HN allows them, and the FAQ, as I said, clearly points to a large number of times dang has explained why they are allowed.
• Usually enough of the commenters who did read the story quote enough of it in their comments that even on those subthreads that have not veered off on some interesting tangent inspired by not covered in the story you can often follow and even meaningfully contribute.
• For submissions that are covering news items there will usually be other sources covering it too. They may not be as thorough as the submitted paywalled site, but usually a quick search with your favorite search engine will turn up enough to let you follow and participate even in those subthreads where no one is quoting enough of the submissions.
• For submissions that are not covering news items and so might not have any other good sources and where no interesting tangents have developed in the comments and no one is quoting enough to help, you can still often tell from the comments whether or not the story is something that interests you. That knowledge can be useful even if you cannot find a free way to access it now.
• If none of the above apply to you it's easy to look at the domain and skip submissions from sites you recognize as having paywalls. It's almost trivial to write a bookmarklet to do that for you if you want to make it even easier.
> Are paywalls ok?
> 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. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic². More here³.
¹ https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html#:~:text=Are%20payw...
² https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10178989
³ https://hn.algolia.com/?query=paywalls%20by:dang&dateRange=a...
I don’t think this is a good way to describe a Taylor column. Here (https://youtu.be/7GGfsW7gOLI?si=Do5_CvAXYSYRu5k9) is a great visualization.
More generally large amounts of mass, in cubic kilometres of ice moving off the Antarctic landmass will have a more noticeable effect, the landmass will lift upwards and the global distribution of mass will change.
There are papers on this, it's a search-fu challenge to find a few.
Or maybe the Fyre "Festival" set a bad example ;)