21–30 of 77 posts
Hey Hugo, do you have an email I could reach you at? I've been thinking/working on these problems for 3 years now and would love to find some smart people to partner with to further develop the ideas. I don't have much to show publicly right now, but https://intpub.org/ (soon to be scipub.app) is the start.
Doesn't seem to work (I don't have a local gateway on this machine): https://www.xirva.org/list/eess.IV/2011/2011.00052 Brings me to https://ipfs.io/ipfs/undefined/2011.00052.pdf which says: invalid ipfs path: invalid path "/ipfs/undefined/2011.00052.pdf": invalid CID: expected 1 as the cid version number, got: 31965309853
Not all articles are uploaded yet, it is still WIP.
From the repo [1]: "research publishing platform that is community based, transparent and censorship resistant " (my emphasis) "Community members moderate the platform and can increase or decrease the visibility of the uploaded files " (again, my emphasis) [1] https://github.com/hugoroussel/xirva
My emphasis.
"You can upload your research and publish it on the open web. Members of the community will be able to vote on your research to raise its visibility." Oh dear.
Love this idea.
Now the same for Sci-Hub?
"You can upload your research and publish it on the open web. Members of the community will be able to vote on your research to raise its visibility." Oh dear.
A perfect system? No, but think about how people must have felt about Wikipedia on launch. Love this idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A perfect system? No, but think about how people must have felt about Wikipedia on launch. Love this idea.
Actually I don't think science has democratic nature. Yes we do somehow do that as a theory would still need to be accepted widely. But in reality one person can have the correct idea while all others disagree. Still this person is doing it right.
Also at the time I was considering IPFS.
But I guess the real trick is implementing a WOT to implement peer review and filter out the inevitable junk that will be published