Live data from Hacker News

Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

gen.lib.rus.ec

181–190 of 265 posts

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#181
post #176
post #171

What I don't get is...why don't governments simply declare that all research at publicly funded universities must be made available to the public. It's seems so trivial. You pay the researchers, you get the research results, you make it available for all citizens (or the world). Companies do this, they keep the research results of their employees.

A major reason, unfortunately, is that they don't want to be interfering with the distribution of scientific articles. For example, if there's a very well-read journal in a specific discipline, but whose contents are only visible with a subscription, then if one countries prevents its researchers from publishing in those journals, research by that country's researchers will be less read. And the reason they do not wa…

Eh, I think you're stretching in your interpretation of the causes of our current science publishing climate. As a current researcher, and former scientific publisher, I think most authors are interested in hitting certain "target" journals, it's a discussion that comes up early on in the research process. They want the right topic audience to read their work, and they want to publish in the highest impact factor journal they can. Some university departments requiore that researchers publish in multiple high impact, or many more low impact, journals before they get tenure. So, I believe countries are mostly unaware of this problem, except for UK and now others, as the UK has been demanding their publicly funded research be open source for a few years.

To me, the problem is that scientists are highly motivated to achieve successes in publishing and prestige and impact, and they are less likely to stand in front of governments and demand open-access and freely circulated articles. This is not in their best interest, I would argue, however they are EXTREMELY busy people, researchers work 60-70 hours with a multitude of different duties. It's not at all surprising they don't have the time to lobby congress vociferously on behalf of the commons.

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it very hard? Take a look at the most successful platform for games, Steam, to see both things aren't mutually exclusive.

There is a huge difference between Steam and Elsevier and I'm not sure why you feel the one is an example of how the other could evolve. The one sells games for entertainment purposes to the masses, the other sells subscriptions to scientific institutions to give them access to research papers. It's b2c vs b2b and a competitive space versus a captive audience.

I'm only trying to refute the claim that "piracy has one USP that the competition lacks that is very hard for them to replicate: convenience". That's disproven by the fact that many companies e.g. Steam have had undeniable success on the back of that convenience.

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think tape would probably be the best choice --- a single LTO-7 tape cartridge holds 6TB and costs <$100USD. Of course the drive is quite expensive, but HDDs are less reliable and more expensive per GB.

Tapes are only good for offline storage. If you want online storage, you'll need one drive per tape, and you would get huge lookup times.

> Tapes are only good for offline storage.

> If you want online storage, you'll need one drive per tape,

No, tape libraries exist, and would be considered 'nearline' storage.

https://www.ibm.com/it-infrastructure/storage/tape/library

> and you would get huge lookup times

Yes. This is not a good system for random access.

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Piracy has one USP that the competition lacks that is very hard for them to replicate: convenience.

That’s the same excuse that’s trotted out in every field with a piracy problem—up until someone finds a way to do it and it turns out it wasn’t an insurmountable problem after all. That’s how we got iTunes, Spotify, Steam, Netflix, and so on.

It's not really an excuse - it truly is convenient in such a way that you only have to go to one place to get the thing you want.

If I want Man in the High Castle, I have to pay for Amazon. But if I want Ozark, I need to pay for Netflix. If I want to watch Metropolis, or The Raven, or The Maltese Falcon, they're old and not any streaming service, even if the rights are owned by a studio. Where can I find them? Yup, bittorrent.

At least piracy more-or-less forced most music to be centralised onto a single service, i.e. in many cases you can get the same songs on Spotify and Apple music. It's a shame piracy didn't force Hollywood studios to sort their out, and allow you to just go to one or two sites. Just look at what Disney are trying to do.

You are of course right: "it wasn’t an insurmountable problem after all" - it's just that studios and publishers squabble. But I'm not holding my breath on Elsevier, MacGrawHill, AddisonWesley, OUP, SUP, etc. to come up with a commerical SciHub.

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a huge difference between Steam and Elsevier and I'm not sure why you feel the one is an example of how the other could evolve. The one sells games for entertainment purposes to the masses, the other sells subscriptions to scientific institutions to give them access to research papers. It's b2c vs b2b and a competitive space versus a captive audience.

I think the parent comment was referring to video game piracy before Steam. It was a mess of custom launchers, DRM, losing the CD/DVD or key so people would turn to piracy to access stuff they already owned. Fast-forward a few year and most people are fine with Steam as long as it's the unified launcher for doing thing.

Pre-Steam also coincided with pre-Internet / online gaming. Having half your software assets lurking on company servers now makes protecting your IP considerably easier.

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#187
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You wouldn't be fined. You'd be arrested and charged criminally, and likely spend the rest of your life in jail. The public does not understand and would happily hang you for being one of those evil hackers. The person who tells them you belong there would be a $1000/hour professional witness. Infinite-term copyright builds dynasties. They do not take kindly to competition. Stay safe.

In most counties you would not go to prison at all. Even in the US, you wouldn't get more than 10 years max.

Even 10 years seems to me completely unimaginable for sharing some PDFs

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#188
As a former scientist, and researching during the 90s, the publishing system that has arisen where a company can monopolise it, and by that, prevent access, is very unfortunate.

No scientist wants their work to be unseen and hidden behind a paywall, but that is what has happened.

Worse still, in some fields amateurs can make a reasonable contribution to the field (my experience is observation astronomy), and the current system hinders that.

So many comments along the lines of I can't find the paper I want without going to SciHub tells you just how broken the current publishing system is.

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#189

If we all got to seeding, surely we’d have the oppressors bent over a filthy toilet in no time at all.

I'm seeding a small Tb too. Sadly I just took some random torrents in order to "randomize" the lot.

It's a shame though that the publications are in zipped files…

Don't forget to download the metadata too !

Re: Sci Hub repository torrents of scientific papers

#190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Piracy has one USP that the competition lacks that is very hard for them to replicate: convenience.

That’s the same excuse that’s trotted out in every field with a piracy problem—up until someone finds a way to do it and it turns out it wasn’t an insurmountable problem after all. That’s how we got iTunes, Spotify, Steam, Netflix, and so on.

I think you're agreeing.

That many people stop pirating as soon as something more convenient comes along does not contradict the idea that people used to pirate because it was convenient.

Post reply on HN