Re:Short sellers are good for markets
by stephengillie on Saturday October 13, 2018 @12:54PM
(#18208862)
Why should a a highly-paid engineer spend a few dollars, when they can spend the time-equivalent of dozens of dollars to not pay?
I'd pay some tiny amount for a single article, but I don't want a full subscription if I don't read the Economist otherwise. Also, I don't want dozens of subscriptions for different sites.
I'd like a system when some tiny amount would be deducted automatically from my account every time I read an article on different sites.
> I'd like a system when some tiny amount would be deducted automatically from my account every time I read an article on different sites.
Figure out how to make that work in the market and you can be a _very_ highly-paid engineer.
Re:Short sellers are good for markets
by stephengillie on Saturday October 13, 2018 @03:23PM
(#18209554)
This sounds like the same situation as the music industry, bundling in an album 12 songs you don't want, along with the 2 you do want.
Or newspapers, where you pay for the 4 sections you won't read, along with the 2 you do read. Or streaming services, paying for the thousands of shows you won't watch, along with the dozen you do watch.
It's probably simpler and cheaper to just clear all your cookies for economist.com and any subdomains.
Re:Short sellers are good for markets
by carbocation on Saturday October 13, 2018 @12:10PM
(#18208635)
Cookies are not preserved in incognito mode; this suggestion does not work.
Note that it is possible for sites to detect incognito mode...
https://gist.github.com/jherax/a81c8c132d09cc354a0e2cb911841...
(You are correct though: my suggestion still doesn't work, for other reasons!)
b) Get a subscription to The Economist