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

Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 237 posts

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#211

Post by toomuchtodo »

marcosdumay wrote: post #186
DarkLinkXXXX wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to point out that Sci-Hub not only stores scientific papers, but it will retrieve official pdf's through an institutions proxy if it can and if necessary. It could perhaps store stuff there, but it could not provide that service there (yet). Until then, torrents of all the files that sci-hub has retrieved (and all files uploaded into libgens scimag section) can be downloaded here. http://libgen.io/scimag/rep…

Does anybody know the total size of the repository?

~50TB

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#212

Post by niij »

finnn wrote: post #35
Fuxy wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accessing the ip posted in the article it shows the bitcoin address posted by the OP. I even switch over to https to make sure the request is not modified.

>switching to https They don't even have a valid certificate for that domain. BUT interestingly, on a US (DO NYC) server or my house (US/Comcast): $ curl http://sci-hub.cc/donate Please donate to Bitcoin: 14ghuGKDAPdEcUQN4zuzGwBUrhQgACwAyA % however, on a French (OVH) server: $ curl http://sci-hub.cc/donate {cut for brevity, a fair amount of HTML here} Please send donations to bitcoin wallet: 1K4t2vSBSS2xFjZ6PofYnbgZ…

I am getting the same thing. Midwest US ISP is getting 14ghu and french (free.fr) server is getting 1K4t2v

Appears to be some sort of caching issue. Archive.org shows sci-hub.org with 1K4t2v from 2015[0]

[0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20150810074804/http://www.sci-hu...

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#213

Post by DarkLinkXXXX »

marcosdumay wrote: post #186
DarkLinkXXXX wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to point out that Sci-Hub not only stores scientific papers, but it will retrieve official pdf's through an institutions proxy if it can and if necessary. It could perhaps store stuff there, but it could not provide that service there (yet). Until then, torrents of all the files that sci-hub has retrieved (and all files uploaded into libgens scimag section) can be downloaded here. http://libgen.io/scimag/rep…

Does anybody know the total size of the repository?

Not AFAIK, but you good get a good idea by downloading all the torrent files, and extracting the torrent size from the metadata. Or maybe just download 1 torrent (since there's over 500 of them, one per 100k files), and multiply the average size per file.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#214

Post by nickpsecurity »

finfet1 wrote: post #91
therobot24 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i haven't heard this, this is interesting any links with more info?

Academia is probably keeping quiet since most of EE, CS, CE is heavily dependent on IEEE publications for reputation and career advancement and paper-reputation.

There would be complaints somewhere you can link to. I have a collection of over 15,000 papers. Many I got off of IEEE/ACM. However, many others I got by typing the name into Google and/or CiteSeerx to find same file. I still can usually get any file I think of and many are still on academics sites. Those are high-profile, too.

So, where's your evidence that IEEE can or is forcing PDF's off the net?

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#215

Post by nickpsecurity »

dougmccune wrote: post #165
semi-extrinsic wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In STM you can make the legit argument that all published research should be open access and the cost of that should come out of the same funding that funded the research. There is no cost of publishing your/my papers as open access. Just follow these easy steps: 1. Write paper, send to journal 2. Do the peer review hokey pokey until paper is accepted 3. Upload preprint version to preprint server (arXiv etc.), with…

That hokey pokey you refer to does cost money. So yes, you can use a system that has costs associated with it, then attempt to ensure those costs can't be recouped. But if that's successful the system will collapse. I assume you'd think that would be good in this case. But I find it funny reasoning to say you should opt-in to publisher-facilitated peer review while trying to tear it down. Wouldn't avoiding publishers…

SciHub is costing around $50k a year to host 50 million papers for free. Elselvier makes a 37% profit margin on 2.07 billion pounds a year. Funny enough, SciHub shows Elselvier could host all scientific knowledge for under 1% of 1% of its revenue while making an operating profit. I'm sure we can find a better trade between widespread access and profitable management of that access than Elselvier. ;)

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#216

Post by nickpsecurity »

grownseed wrote: post #135
grownseed wrote: post #109

Recently shared this here: http://www.thebookseller.com/news/elsevier-defends-its-value... ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11614926 ) which I'm guessing is the precursor to this debacle. Reading what Elsevier have to say, you'd think they're either completely delusional (I doubt so), or know full well that they're rapidly becoming irrelevant/abhorred and are adopting a bully position, all the while pretending…

Just saw Elsevier retweeted this: "Science is better and more accurate when it's inclusive." ( https://twitter.com/ElsevierConnect/status/72821552586887578... ) I realize this is about gender, but I can't help but feel a bit of irony in there...

Great observation. They're calling their own BS indirectly. Whoever is involved in SciHub with strong presence on social media should immediately start using that quote to push SciHub. :)

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#217

Post by ashitlerferad »

sharpneli wrote: post #98
dceddia wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What prevents a group of scientists from setting up doingscience.io or whatever, and publishing their results to a big shared blog? Do the contracts stipulate that their findings can only be published in specific paid journals?

Money. Research grants are given mostly by amount of publications in well known journals. If they just start a blog then they won't get further grants and have to change careers. The effect of Impact Factor ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor ) in academic grants is ridiculously high. So in the end it's not the scientists who can make the switch. It's the people who pay the scientists.

Who are these people and how can people contact them?

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#220

Post by dougmccune »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #215
dougmccune wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That hokey pokey you refer to does cost money. So yes, you can use a system that has costs associated with it, then attempt to ensure those costs can't be recouped. But if that's successful the system will collapse. I assume you'd think that would be good in this case. But I find it funny reasoning to say you should opt-in to publisher-facilitated peer review while trying to tear it down. Wouldn't avoiding publishers…

SciHub is costing around $50k a year to host 50 million papers for free. Elselvier makes a 37% profit margin on 2.07 billion pounds a year. Funny enough, SciHub shows Elselvier could host all scientific knowledge for under 1% of 1% of its revenue while making an operating profit. I'm sure we can find a better trade between widespread access and profitable management of that access than Elselvier. ;)

But no publisher is arguing that the hosting of PDFs is the expensive part of their business. If it was then you're right and researchers should just send their finished PDFs straight to sci-hub for hosting. But hosting a PDF is only a tiny, and as you've identified, an inconsequential part of the equation.
Post reply on HN