News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by jay_kyburz on Friday February 10, 2017 @10:45PM (#13620870)
I would consider perhaps $5-$10 a month if the WSJ was going to be my only source of news. If I could trust it to provide me with all I need every morning while I eat my breakfast.

Unfortunately I live in Australia so most stuff in WSJ I don't care about. (And we have the ABC)

Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by x0x0 on Saturday February 11, 2017 @05:16AM (#13622017)
The Washington Post, one of the three best papers in America (NYT, WSJ, Post), is $50/year if you're a prime subscriber.
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by emddudley on Saturday February 11, 2017 @12:59PM (#13623776)
I'm only seeing a $144/year option?
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by x0x0 on Saturday February 11, 2017 @01:26PM (#13623914)
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by harryjo on Saturday February 11, 2017 @12:24AM (#13621178)
Why is a full feed of quality news worth less to you than Netflix?
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by aianus on Saturday February 11, 2017 @12:29AM (#13621203)
Netflix provides many times more hours of entertainment than the WSJ could ever hope to.
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by jasonthevillain on Saturday February 11, 2017 @10:50AM (#13623102)
If you consider news only an entertainment product, that's a fair comparison. If you want to know what's going on in the world, it's not.
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by helthanatos on Saturday February 11, 2017 @12:34AM (#13621213)
Netflix costs too much for what it is. News that you can find anywhere else is certainly not worth much. Yes, depending upon how you wish it to be documented and such, it may be worth it but I don't understand the want to see any more news than the local news and what Google can provide. I'm not against supporting; I just wonder why anyone would spend more than an hour a day reading news from one source.
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by hnbroseph on Saturday February 11, 2017 @06:21PM (#13625464)
"quality news" is rarely consistent or reliable.

wsj in particular had some rather absurd hit pieces on bernie sanders.

Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by jay_kyburz on Saturday February 11, 2017 @02:44AM (#13621624)
Netflix is $9 a month here in Australia.
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by BigJeffeRonaldo on Saturday February 11, 2017 @07:41PM (#13625847)
Nobody pays for Netflix; they just use their cousin's/sister's/girlfriend's/etc.'s account.
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by executive on Saturday February 11, 2017 @12:46AM (#13621251)
Not sure if this is a good deal, but take a look: https://myaccount.news.com.au/theaustralian/subscribe?pkgDef...
Re:The Wall Street Journal to Close Google Loophole Entirely by jay_kyburz on Saturday February 11, 2017 @02:48AM (#13621632)
$16 a month for The Australian and the WSJ for 3 months, then $32 a month. That is a bit steep given we all already pay for http://www.abc.net.au/news/