> They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news in Economist / FT / WSJ / WashingtonPost etc...
> Well except paying $300 a month
It looks like the WSJ is available for $2/mo or the WaPo for $2.50 mo. You probably don’t need all of them simultaneously as they frequently cover the same topics, including pretty much all of the big news stories - subscribe to one for a year then switch to another. And even if you aren’t subscribed to all of them you are still contributing in a small way to keeping good journalism alive.
My reply was to help the grandparent commenter who said "They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news". If you already have multiple paid news subscriptions that are working great for you, you can ignore my suggestions. Edit: Ah, you were the grandparent commenter who said "They are the only reliable way for me to read proper news."
dmortin · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://www.wsj.com/business/entrepreneurship/burned-out-and-unemployed-young-people-in-china-are-launching-ai-startups-c5ebcdc3" rel="nofollow">https://www.wsj.com/business/entrepreneurship/burned-out-and...
Error: Invalid InterceptionId.
cluckindan · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Archive.today_guidance" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Archive.today_guidan...
apexalpha · · focus · HN ↗
Well except paying $300 a month I guess.
no-name-here · · focus · HN ↗
> Well except paying $300 a month
It looks like the WSJ is available for $2/mo or the WaPo for $2.50 mo. You probably don’t need all of them simultaneously as they frequently cover the same topics, including pretty much all of the big news stories - subscribe to one for a year then switch to another. And even if you aren’t subscribed to all of them you are still contributing in a small way to keeping good journalism alive.
apexalpha · · focus · HN ↗
Just a matter of priorities.
no-name-here · · focus · HN ↗