I just now read the article with Firefox and NoScript. No NYT paywall for me.
I just now tried with Safari, after turning off JavaScript. No problem viewing the entire article, including pictures. Of course I reset Safari before opening the URL, just to make sure there were no existing cookies, etc.
I love the NYT paywall. The only way they could have made it easier to bypass would have been to include directions on how to disable JavaScript at the top of every page! BTW this is deliberate. It's not like they're idiots. They intentionally decided to make the paywall easy to get around.
Most people if they run into this often enough will just pay the $15/month, for various reasons. For those that don't have any money, simply viewing in incognito mode is sufficient to bypass the paywall.
Of all the things that I spend money on each month, though, the $15 that I send to NYT is easily the one I feel that I get the most value from.
"This easy trick, known to every college student, led some to deride the Times as a technological tyro. People in the news industry, however, say the Times deliberately chose to make the paywall “leaky” so as not to alienate casual visitors."
"While critics say the gaps highlight flaws in the newspapers' new business model, the Times says the holes are deliberate and meant to encourage openness across the Internet."
I just now tried with Safari, after turning off JavaScript. No problem viewing the entire article, including pictures. Of course I reset Safari before opening the URL, just to make sure there were no existing cookies, etc.
I love the NYT paywall. The only way they could have made it easier to bypass would have been to include directions on how to disable JavaScript at the top of every page! BTW this is deliberate. It's not like they're idiots. They intentionally decided to make the paywall easy to get around.