That's a truly beautiful hack. Personally, I find it totally appropriate to use the service to extract the content without paying for it, because the content provider is trying to exploit Google, dangling content you were interested enough in to click through on it only to yank it away.
The problem is that nobody has put in place a workable method to routinely and painlessly collect a *small* payment for looking at content on the Web. If it cost a nickel extra on my next monthly bill for me to read an article I found in a search, I'd have no problem with it. But it doesn't make sense for me to pay for a year's subscription to a site just to read one article, and it also doesn't make sense for me to pay enough for one article that they could print it out and mail it to me and still make a tidy profit, and those seem to tbe the only models that exist of charging the user for web content.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-07-21 08:31 pm (UTC)The problem is that nobody has put in place a workable method to routinely and painlessly collect a *small* payment for looking at content on the Web. If it cost a nickel extra on my next monthly bill for me to read an article I found in a search, I'd have no problem with it. But it doesn't make sense for me to pay for a year's subscription to a site just to read one article, and it also doesn't make sense for me to pay enough for one article that they could print it out and mail it to me and still make a tidy profit, and those seem to tbe the only models that exist of charging the user for web content.