Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 398 posts

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#311

Post by dredmorbius »

sghi wrote: post #174
dredmorbius wrote: post #84

I was interviewed for this article though not mentioned in it. My use case isn't mentioned: unaffiliated researchers with limited access to journals doing our own exploration of areas. I've compiled a library of several thousand articles (and via other sources, books) which for both access and portability I prefer electronic versions. My 10" tablet is almost perfect for reading printed material, and functions as a sm…

Just as an aside, you could try Zotero - I use it on my laptop and phone and it works pretty well for me. There is a dedicated app as well. https://www.zotero.org/

I'm not sure there's any one tool that fits my needs, and I've looked at a few, Zotero among them.

My understanding is that it's more a _bibliographic management_ tool.

There's also Calibre, which seems like it's a close solution, though that too is problematic, particularly at scale.

Another problem is that my laptop (as opposed to tablet) isn't particularly useful for reading formatted documents -- PDFs can't really be viewed _either_ one-up or two-up, and FBReader, which I like on mobile, formats ePub and similar eBook formats poorly (too wide, insufficient paragraph separation, unfamiliar controls), which is frustrating as well.

The tablet's much superior for _reading_ but even worse for _organising_ material.

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#312

Post by gregw134 »

kanzure wrote: post #300
gregw134 wrote: post #33

Have any of the mirror sites uploaded all 50M papers as a torrent yet? They really should...

> any of the mirror sites uploaded all 50M papers as a torrent yes... but their bandwidth (seeding) is atrocious. Send help.

Where can I find the torrent?

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#313

Post by pahool »

gambiting wrote: post #127

I guess that soon governments will start forcing ISPs to ban access to Sci-Hub, just like they did with Pirate Bay and Kickass Torrents. It's still trivial to type into google "pirate bay proxy" and access it quickly, but I can see some legislation happening against it soon.

It's fully mirrored and available on a .onion site accessible through tor:

scihub22266oqcxt.onion

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#314

Post by bcook »

alanwatts wrote: post #295
bcook wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The math equation?

Which one?

The one that proves my point... :)

Honestly, if you are implying that math is a philosophy that is just as fallible as human emotion I am very interested, although very, very skeptical.

PS - Please do not ruin math. It serves as my only foundation with reality.

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#315

Post by maaku »

chris_wot wrote: post #309
kefka wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, so researching an interesting phenomenon, that is already cited in journals is somehow "not science"? I'd be careful about letting your own biases affect you negatively. Simply put, there may or may be nothing there. With diagnostic methods and feedback from the person, we can start to determine if there is a measurable effect. If there's something there, we research further. If not, we cite it as proof "no notic…

What did you mean by "that shouldn't be in any academic paper until my recommendation of measuring it is done"? I think that might be the sticking point.

This is what I was responding to.

I happen to think occultists are wrong (as in: factually incorrect in their beliefs). But they are entitled to think whatever they want, so that's not a problem. What is a problem is objecting to data being collected and published.

But it seems that his speech-to-text translator wasn't accurate and that's not what he meant.

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#316

Post by maaku »

kefka wrote: post #310
chris_wot wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did you mean by "that shouldn't be in any academic paper until my recommendation of measuring it is done"? I think that might be the sticking point.

I was using google speaking keyboard. I was at a stoplight and spoke it and submitted. I'm all for scientific method, be it showing positive, negative, or no results. I also know what isn't currently scientific, although I do have curiosity if some of those 'things' can indeed be proved.

Everything is "scientific" so long as it is subjected to unbiased skeptical experimental evaluation. That's all it means to be "scientific."

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#317

Post by maaku »

aab0 wrote: post #260
School-Cotton wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't claim there wasn't a problem, just gave practical advice for making the most of the unfair situation

Even more practical advice: 'use Libgen'.

I somehow misread that as 'use Lojban' and was momentarily both confused and delighted :\

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#318

Post by nxzero »

kefka wrote: post #310
chris_wot wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did you mean by "that shouldn't be in any academic paper until my recommendation of measuring it is done"? I think that might be the sticking point.

I was using google speaking keyboard. I was at a stoplight and spoke it and submitted. I'm all for scientific method, be it showing positive, negative, or no results. I also know what isn't currently scientific, although I do have curiosity if some of those 'things' can indeed be proved.

This is not how science works, that is just paying attention to results that back your hypothesis or biases; in fact, doing this is not science at all.

EDIT: An example of this in the wild is how drug companies would cherry pick research to back the outcome the wanted; cherry picking is an anti-pattern of true science.

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#319

Post by ujjwalg »

I wrote about horrors of scientific publishing not just from the viewership side, but also from publishing side a few years ago. tl;dr - Publishers have just too much control on publishing process and distribution process when they bring almost nothing to the table in the digital world we are living today. The very fact that as a scientist you can only submit a paper to one journal at a time and wait for months and sometimes a year to get a response is insane and completely unacceptable. Imagine if you have to do it when you are applying for a job.

If someone wants to read it, here is a link: http://ujjwalg.com/blog/2013/5/3/the-problem-with-the-scient...

Re: Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone

#320

Post by ghettoimp »

gautamdivgi wrote: post #292
mmierz wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another important reason for slow adoption of open access is that most open access journals charge significant publication fees ($1000 or more.) Most academic labs run on shoestring budgets, so that's a lot of money. The principal investigator has to choose between standing on principle and publishing open access, or paying for equipment and reagents or sending students to conferences. That's not an easy choice to ma…

Agreed - that's a good point. In fact Elsevier has caught on to this as well. I remember when I published with them they gave me an option of making my paper open access if I paid somewhere around $1000 (or maybe it was $3000). I ignored that option. I agree there are costs - typesetting (well - I did send a LaTeX manuscript), etc. but not $1000 worth. If they'd said $100 - now I would have definitely considered the…

Their re-typesetting your articles can just be pure grief, too.

For the last journal article I published, in a journal run by Springer, we submitted a nicely typeset LaTeX article using the template they provided.

Our best theory is that they then copy/pasted the result into Word. It came back to us as a "pre-print" PDF with tons of errors, font changes, etc. We had no good way to compare it to the original other than printing them both out and going through, line by line, looking for discrepancies. There were dozens and dozens of problems. And it was a 70 page article!

After sending them corrections we got to repeat this process 3 times.

And now they charge folks for our article.

Fuck. :(

Post reply on HN