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

What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

osc.universityofcalifornia.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 211 posts

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#51

Post by tomxor »

Random thought, with fight club math :) - The only remaining value journals like Elsevier have are their giant stash of papers, it's the sole thing perpetuating the whole absurd organization... so:

  A. How much money do Elsevier take from universities each year?

  B. How many years will it take for Elsevier to go bankrupt without income from said universities?

  C. How much money will it take to buy *all papers* from the auction at the bankruptcy of Elsevier?
If A * B >= C then all universities could save the money they spend on Elsevier to put all of their papers in public domain (Assuming B is not impractically long and assuming Elsevier don't do something evil and down size enough to sustain themselves indefinitely while sitting on a hoard of papers).

Once the content is freed universities can invest their publishing money in something more worth while like open access distribution networks.

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#52

Post by n1000 »

dash2 wrote: post #4

Man, I hate Elsevier with a passion. As well as being shady, dishonest, shifty, moneygrubbing toerags, they also provide the world's crappiest service. I have to use their web interface every time I submit a paper to an Elsevier journal. It's like sticking needles into my eyes. It's this bad: in 2019, they still use an image map for their main menu. A particular pleasure is when they force me to compile my TeX into a…

Another fun fact about Elsevier: In their contract with university libraries they exclude the right of fair use as described in the US copyright law. That means one can download papers, but technically mustn't use the data found in them without consent. This is just ridiculous.

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#53

Post by michaelmior »

dash2 wrote: post #4

Man, I hate Elsevier with a passion. As well as being shady, dishonest, shifty, moneygrubbing toerags, they also provide the world's crappiest service. I have to use their web interface every time I submit a paper to an Elsevier journal. It's like sticking needles into my eyes. It's this bad: in 2019, they still use an image map for their main menu. A particular pleasure is when they force me to compile my TeX into a…

> I hope their CEO becomes homeless.

Not having experienced homelessness myself, this still isn't something I would wish in anyone.

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#54

Post by jacobolus »

jraph wrote: post #43
dessant wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The papers they hold hostage have not been fully backed up [1] and made accessible for everyone. Elsevier does deserve to go bankrupt, but we must ensure that the information they have amassed gets salvaged. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5832410/

I had a laugh reading this. > Readers should note that, in many jurisdictions, use of Sci-Hub may constitute copyright infringement. Users of Sci-Hub do so at their own risk. This study is not an endorsement of using Sci-Hub, and its authors and publishers accept no responsibility on behalf of readers. There is a possibility that Sci-Hub users — especially those not using privacy-enhancing services such as Tor — coul…

Note that the former and current Editors-in-Chief of that journal are both UC Berkeley biologists (also huge critics of paywalled science).

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#55

Post by bschne »

The basic problem with the alternative of open access journals seems to be the incentives to get as many articles out as possible to reap the per-article publication fees, which ends up affecting review/editing quality.

Have there been experiments in yet other, more decentralized models of academic publishing? Think something like Arxiv but with more features for discussion/review/endorsments by other researchers in the field, maybe?

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#56

Post by phoe-krk »

Iv wrote: post #14

I don't even want to read the article. I am on UC's side whatever happened. Hearing someone is having a dispute against Elsevier is like hearing someone is fighting polymetis. I just know which side I want to see win. The fact that no politician ever moved to destroy Elsevier destructive behavior that impairs research shows how little interest they have in scientific research.

> I don't even want to read the article. I am on UC's side whatever happened.

Nothing in particular happened. You should read that article. It's good stuff coming straight from UC.

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#57

Post by [deleted] »

malms wrote: post #34
TeMPOraL wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to coordination problems. Nobody loves them, but short-term, publishing with them is still the optimal move for scientist's career. > If everybody were to just stop, That's the root of all human-created hard problems on this planet; it's not exclusive to scientific publishing. People don't spontaneously coordinate. As long as it's in the short-term interest of any individual to not be the first one to stop, o…

It's not a "problem". elsevier has been creating actual value for years. It's becoming a problem now precisely because we think they are creating more problems than value. It's always the value market which dictates what happens. Even a dictator has provide values for enough people (not necessarily its citizen) to stay in power.

[deleted]

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#58

Post by BorRagnarok »

michaelmior wrote: post #53
dash2 wrote: post #4

Man, I hate Elsevier with a passion. As well as being shady, dishonest, shifty, moneygrubbing toerags, they also provide the world's crappiest service. I have to use their web interface every time I submit a paper to an Elsevier journal. It's like sticking needles into my eyes. It's this bad: in 2019, they still use an image map for their main menu. A particular pleasure is when they force me to compile my TeX into a…

> I hope their CEO becomes homeless. Not having experienced homelessness myself, this still isn't something I would wish in anyone.

Oh I would, and that he may go completely broke too, and die miserable, alone, and in pain. These people's greed has caused enormous harm and cost uncountable lives. That's what keeping this knowledge to yourself does, otherwise our doctors would still be doing bloodletting and sacrificing small animals. And in a certain way, we still are. Which doctor has the money to access all those journals? Lost of clues to a cure for lots of diseases are probably buried somewhere in expensive journals.

But noo, please for the love of money withhold the doctor that information, let him pay thousands of dollars for it, so that he will not read any of it, and let his patients suffer and die. Like they did when we were still doing bloodletting.

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#59

Post by inflatableDodo »

Iv wrote: post #18
jcampbell1 wrote: post #6

"The UC Libraries do not endorse the use of Sci-Hub for article access.”30 As the UC Berkeley university librarian said in a published interview, “we are unequivocal: it is our understanding (though we are not attorneys!) that Sci-Hub is in violation of U.S. copyright law. We will not advise nor help anyone to use it" That is probably the best endorsing non-endorcement I have read. It never says they discourage SciHu…

At one point, that's a coward's stance. Alexandra Elbakyan's contribution to scientific research at this stage is probably higher than any university's library. Recognize that everyone uses it because none of the legal options are acceptable. Say it and urge a long overdue change in copyright laws. It is abnormal that Elbakyan is the outlaw and Elsevier the respectable institution here.

>It is abnormal that Elbakyan is the outlaw and Elsevier the respectable institution here.

Rather than abnormal, is an archetype by this point, given the case is viewed almost universally as a Robin Hood vs Sheriff of Nottingham kind of a thing.

Re: What you may have heard about the dispute between UC and Elsevier

#60

Post by duckerude »

jraph wrote: post #43
dessant wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The papers they hold hostage have not been fully backed up [1] and made accessible for everyone. Elsevier does deserve to go bankrupt, but we must ensure that the information they have amassed gets salvaged. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5832410/

I had a laugh reading this. > Readers should note that, in many jurisdictions, use of Sci-Hub may constitute copyright infringement. Users of Sci-Hub do so at their own risk. This study is not an endorsement of using Sci-Hub, and its authors and publishers accept no responsibility on behalf of readers. There is a possibility that Sci-Hub users — especially those not using privacy-enhancing services such as Tor — coul…

> Since the ledger of Bitcoin transactions is public, we can evaluate the donation activity to known Sci-Hub addresses (1K4t2vSBSS2xFjZ6PofYnbgZewjeqbG1TM, 14ghuGKDAPdEcUQN4zuzGwBUrhQgACwAyA, 1EVkHpdQ8VJQRpQ15hSRoohCztTvDMEepm).

Subtle

Post reply on HN