See: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html

Section "Are paywalls ok?"

The answer to DAE questions is always yes, regardless of the question.

I think it’s a bad idea - there’s no need to ban discussion of an article because not everyone can read it.

Especially when paywalls aren't really hard to bypass. Usually any thread involving a paywalled article will include an archive link.

For example: https://archive.is/qG0hS

According to the FAQs, articles that not everyone can read are banned from HN.

However, that doesn't include articles on NY Times, WSJ, Washington Post, Economist etc, because those sites' paywalls can be bypassed easily using something like https://archive.md.

If you want to read their articles so bad, what stops you from paying for NYT?

Maybe it's not the article itself, but they want everyone to be able to take part in the discussion.

I don't think it's an unreasonable thing to want, especially on a site that values open and public discussions.

You make it sound like reading the article is a requirement to be able to comment.

My understanding is that paywalled articles should be bypassable. It's okay to ask how to bypass it, but not to [hypothetically] complain about the need to bypass it.

"Simplified view" in Brave bypasses the paywall. I assume "reader view" in Firefox does the same.