Is latimes.com Down?
Is anyone else having trouble accessing the L.A. Times web site?
Or is it just me?
Is anyone else having trouble accessing the L.A. Times web site?
Or is it just me?
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
Powered by WordPress.
your link works for me
carlitos (34f76e) — 1/6/2009 @ 7:13 amJust me, then.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 1/6/2009 @ 7:17 amThey finally got sick of you tearing them a new one, and just decided to block you from seeing the site. If you can’t read it, you can’t call them on their crap…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/6/2009 @ 7:24 amThis Web site allows you to check for yourself: http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com
Bradley J. Fikes (0ea407) — 1/6/2009 @ 7:44 amWorking on the left coast 😉
Steven W. (7661c7) — 1/6/2009 @ 7:50 am‘Tis you.
Chris (d098d0) — 1/6/2009 @ 8:37 amClear your cookie, try again.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 1/6/2009 @ 8:40 amHere’s a pretty reasonable free proxy:
Steven Den Beste (99cfa1) — 1/6/2009 @ 9:18 amhttp://anonymouse.org/anonwww.html
I’m having trouble accessing their website.
Of course, for me, the problem is that I don’t want to.
Sean P (e57269) — 1/6/2009 @ 9:24 amThe Times has a website?
AD (4f3c82) — 1/6/2009 @ 9:30 amWho knew, or cared?
Works fine…was able to determine they are giving editorial space to Hamas (again) in less than two minutes. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-marzook6-2009jan06,0,7451769.story
Matt W (bd2e9d) — 1/6/2009 @ 9:51 amIt worked for me.
Ken Hahn (4c0192) — 1/6/2009 @ 10:12 amI am heartened by the fact that most comments are not pro-Hamas…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/6/2009 @ 10:30 am…they are giving editorial space to Hamas (again) in less than two minutes.
If I were an LAT subscriber and read the linked piece, I would immediately cancel my subscription. What a disgrace.
Dana (137151) — 1/6/2009 @ 11:39 amSo, the LAT is treating Patterico like Patterico treats my and my comments? Let’s see if this one goes down the memory hole.
Crixus (a83d56) — 1/6/2009 @ 11:57 amI’ve been having problems loading up that site, too.
My mouse pointer seems programmed to evade the link, pulling me away like a ouija board planchette in Resko’s backyard. If the site does start to load, it’s almost unreadable, what with the red font on the red background. And if it does finally load up completely, the power goes out in my neighborhood and a teacher comes in and takes my computer.
bobby b (4baf73) — 1/6/2009 @ 12:01 pmJust checked a link from Instapundit, slamming CFL bulbs.
LarryD (feb78b) — 1/6/2009 @ 12:15 pmi rarely bother with their website, but we just got another “please buy our crappy paper and we’ll give you a Vons gift card” letter in today’s mail.
for additional moonbattery, the envelopes are marked “SFI Certified Sourcing” and “Made with 100% wind power”.
as i always do with junk mail that includes a postage paid return envelope, i will carefully remove our address and any bar codes, and mail everything else, plus whatever else i have on had that fill fit, back to them.
it’s the least i can do for such a wonderful organization….. %-)
redc1c4 (27fd3e) — 1/6/2009 @ 12:37 pm‘hand’ as in “…have on hand….”
redc1c4 (27fd3e) — 1/6/2009 @ 12:39 pmJust checked a link from Instapundit, slamming CFL bulbs.
Comment by LarryD — 1/6/2009 @ 12:15 pm
‘Just thought I’d weigh in on this one. In brief, I went almost completely flourescent about 20+ years ago. The “old” ones are largely still working. I’ve got probably around 30 bulbs/tubes still working, even outdoor, from back then. But the new flourescent ones I’ve used seem to burn out faster than even the incandescents! So right now, I wouldn’t go “new CFL’s”. I’d go incandescents.
J."Trashman" Peden (e74c7e) — 1/6/2009 @ 6:05 pmIs anyone else having trouble accessing the L.A. Times web site?
Or is it just me?
Well, there still are not any comments posted on the LAT Reader Response component of the LAT blog sites concerning Gold’s iterated justification as to why Hiltzik was returned to [at least] his previous position within the LAT.
Thus, anyone might have trouble accessing the L.A. Times web site, including me.
The question for the LAT personell is whether they want to go down with the ship, or whether they instead want to have a fair shot at having a reasonably human life.
J."Trashman" Peden (e74c7e) — 1/6/2009 @ 7:12 pmIf they are targeting you, you can buy a new account, under a different name (have a friend online give you his password). Then ONLY access the LAT site using Tor, so they can’t trace your IP. You will have access to the LAT again. They can’t keep you out.
(The easiest way to use Tor is to download Tor, Vidalia, and TorButton for FireFox)
Daryl Herbert (b65640) — 1/6/2009 @ 8:54 pm