This is the first article I've seen on historytoday.com, and given the statistics it's likely I won't want to read another article from them until 2062. It doesn't look so interesting I want to pay $5 a month in perpetuity, or even go through the efforts of coming up with a username and password for the free trial. I don't even want to pirate it. I'd maybe pay $1 to read it, if I could do that with no strings attached.
Hell, I couldn't even get a "pirated" copy via archive.is, so instead I'll just add this to my mental filter of sites I will never, ever read under any circumstances.
> If I can't get their long-form, well-researched articles for free with no strings attached whatsoever, then I will add this to my mental filter of sites I will never, ever read under any circumstances.
By the way this article is not just a rehash of wikipedia like most stuff. Somebody did research. I know because I have no money to subscribe and I thought surely it's all on wikipedia. But there is literally nothing about Amelia
How has this been upvoted to over 40 points when, judging by the comments, literally not a single person has been able to read this paywalled article?
I know HN is fine with paywalled articles, but usually they're from major sites that at least some people have access to, and somebody is able to post a non-paywalled link.
I was gravely disappointed to find that, contrary to what the comic suggested, it was NOT possible to read the rest of the article in Latin if you are not a subscriber.
This is the first article I've seen on historytoday.com, and given the statistics it's likely I won't want to read another article from them until 2062. It doesn't look so interesting I want to pay $5 a month in perpetuity, or even go through the efforts of coming up with a username and password for the free trial. I don't even want to pirate it. I'd maybe pay $1 to read it, if I could do that with no strings attached.