For those curious about what channels are likely available where you live, there are some excellent web-based tools at http://www.tvfool.com to help answer that.

You can give your address or coordinates and the height above ground of your proposed antenna, and they will calculate based on the location and height of your local station's antennas and the terrain between you and them how good your signal should be.

They will give you maps and tables showing this and showing what directions you need to aim your antenna for each channel.

Besides the paywall issue: why is this news? Just to bash millennials?

The word "Amazing" in the title here is clearly meant to be sarcastic unless someone legitimately thinks over the air programming is amazing in 2017.

"Breaking News: People Don't Understand Technology That Hasn't Been Used Widely Since Before They Were Born" isn't as catchy.

With that said, I'm a millennial and I remember antennas quite well... it was one of the first things I got when cord cutting so I could get local channels... I don't know if the article surveys a group of people because I can't read it but the title makes it sound like it is a self selected group that may not be representative of the population.

Edit: Furthermore most millennials should remember the talk about antennas when the analog to digital cutover happened. It was a huge discussion how everyone who used antennas needed to update their tuners to accept the digital signal.

What's there to discuss, if we can't read the article?

There's a pretty reliable way past the WSJ paywall, which many here use: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgct3Jn8pFA

OK, setting aside the snark now, there is quite often excellent discussion here of paywalled articles, even when the vast majority cannot read the article. There are several factors that contribute to this.

1. The people who have read the article often include enough context in their comments for others to make meaningful contributions just from that they see in the comments.

2. There are a lot of smart people here who often take articles and comments as launching points to go off on very interesting tangents. That's often the most valuable part of the discussion.

Probably the majority of the HN discussions I've marked as "favorites" to save for future reference are because of comments that really have little to do with the article.

3. If it is actually an interesting article, other sites will either have their own coverage of the topic, or will write articles about the article and include plenty of quotes. A little Googling usually finds those, and they provide enough to let you jump into the comments if the topic is actually one where you need to be familiar with the article to handle. Some of these other sites start covering the story within an hour of the initial publication at the paywall site.

Googling "millenials and TV antennas" and asking for hits from the past 24 hours shows that sfgate.com, motherjones.com, and boingboing.net picked up the WSJ story.

If you google the headline, you will see places that have the article but no paywall.

This is no longer true. The paywall now applies to google search links.

Except that it is true. That's exactly how I read the article, so it is guaranteed to be a true statement about how to find a readable version of the article.

I didn't say to subvert the paywall with google. I said that you can google for sites that have the article.

> Carlos Villalobos, 21, who was selling tube-shaped digital antennas ... says customers often ask if his $20 to $25 products are legal. “They don’t trust me when I say that these are actually free local channels,

In most countries of EU antennas are illegal, you have to pay license fee.

This is news to me. I live in Portugal and antennas of all shapes and sizes (analogue, digital, satellite, and so on) are readily available at hardware stores in my country. Buying one never involved any drama: just pick one up, pay for it and you're sorted.

I'd be surprised if it was any different in other EU countries.

It's not because you have to pay for a license that antennas are illegal...

Now this is really interesting and funny.

We should really stop posting links that are behind a paywall.

it wasn't behind a paywall when i read and upvoted it.