The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019) • Hacker News Board

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#201

Post by thulecitizen » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

rapnie wrote: post #188

bergstromm466 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok you might want to watch this short documentary. Your fun 'pirated' games and software with 'better support' might cost you dearly when your daughter or your girlfriend/wife gets filmed by a hacker, using your own webcam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFS3p0emftw - "Security awareness: Filmmaker explores RAT malware, buys access to random PCs for just 15 cents a piece - made short film about his experience" Movie…

"This video contains content from VPRO BROADCAST, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds." The video is unpirated in The Netherlands (VPRO is Dutch too).

Yep. So if you're in the Netherlands, click here: https://www.vpro.nl/programmas/3lab/rats-en-slaves

For some reason they blocked it in the Netherlands. But if you're trying to watch it from outside of the Netherlands, it works great. I tried with a VPN.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#202

Post by DrJaws » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

fbn79 wrote: post #28

Why not a low cost subscription app like Spotify that rewards the publishers (and I hope, by conseguence Authors and Reviewers)? This would be appetible to more general academy world (even low grade schools) and even small business that do research and development. And could create a more virtuose author/reviewers gratification.

why they should earn more from those papers when they are already paid to research them?

It's knowledge, it should be free and open to help the humanity to advance and push new boundaries.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#203

Post by thulecitizen » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 6:55 PM UTC

bananamerica wrote: post #173

bergstromm466 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok you might want to watch this short documentary. Your fun 'pirated' games and software with 'better support' might cost you dearly when your daughter or your girlfriend/wife gets filmed by a hacker, using your own webcam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFS3p0emftw - "Security awareness: Filmmaker explores RAT malware, buys access to random PCs for just 15 cents a piece - made short film about his experience" Movie…

I do not pirate anything anymore, but I have covered my webcam with tape for many years. I also don't have a daughter, but I am Brazilian. Just adding a data point.

It's not just about webcams or recording your microphone. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#204

Post by Calloutman » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 7:31 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #166

SeanAppleby wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "low impact factor", you're referring to a combination of lack of prestige and lack of readership that leads to few citations and subsequently little influence on the field, right? If so, why is the prestigious curation of the journal that leads academics to reading your paper and taking it seriously inextricably tied to whether or not it's behind a paywall at all? What's stopping someone from building a…

Yes, many (but not all) of the top journals are closed. A lot of scientists talk big when it comes to open access, but when it comes time for them to publish their own work, they published in closed journals since they have a bigger impact factor. They basically put their own careers ahead of their belief in supporting open access.

I understand that completely. Feeling good about yourself for sticking it to the man doesn't support a family.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#205

Post by SamBam » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

thegranderson wrote: post #172

SamBam wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Thus, I disagree with the article: the single minimalist interface is definitely something that contributes to Sci-Hub's popularity. I'm trying to understand what you disagree with in the article. If anything, it complements sci-hub's "alleged seamlessness."

I think the disagreement is with this claim from the article (2nd to last paragraph): Sci-Hub, more so than RG, therefore seems to have a greater potential for disrupting the current order of things and poses a significant threat to publishers and librarians, who cling to the mistaken belief that the key to Sci-Hub’s success is its alleged seamlessness (a single sign-on), which if they can replicate will go away. The…

Ah, I see. However, I understood OP's primary reason for preferring Sci-Hub to be the one that he iterated in their first paragraph: "Nevertheless, I prefer this platform because I disagree with the publishing model of most publishers...."

That seemed to agree with the bulk of the article, even if they also liked the UX better. The article doesn't say it isn't better, it just says that the UX isn't the primary reason most researchers are using it. That seems to jive with OP.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#206

Post by ajford » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 8:06 PM UTC

maeln wrote: post #72

Topolomancer wrote: post #5

I am part of a well-funded university, so I have access to all the papers without using Sci-Hub. Nevertheless, I prefer this platform because I disagree with the publishing model of most publishers. Let's not get into the details here, but there is all kinds of shoddy editorship happening all over the place---I have seen at least one blatant case of plagiarism in an Elsevier journal: no one cares. I have experienced…

When I was a student in engineer school in France, I had access to a lot of paper through our school subscription. I was still using Sci-Hub all the time because just copy-pasting a DOI or a paper title and getting the PDF was so much better than all the other website which had all clunky and broken login procedure, and god awful UI/UX (understanding how to download the PDF was sometimes more of a challenge than unde…

When I was a student in physics, the campus network didn't extend to the student housing or off-site students, meaning you had to be on campus or in the library to access the portals to get papers.

I used sci-hub during my last year in school, but it was only just starting. It was far easier to use, plus I didn't have to compile a list of papers to fetch and wait until the next day to retrieve them.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#207

Post by Accujack » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 8:08 PM UTC

bergstromm466 wrote: post #159

speeder wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am brazillian. Here people BUY pirated stuff, sometimes more expensive than the original. The reason is convenience and good service. When you buy pirated software and games from the street dealer, you get: often, better support than the publisher (specially for popular software, you ask him what is bothering you, he probably memorized the solution and tells you, while publisher support often is completely null, Go…

Ok you might want to watch this short documentary. Your fun 'pirated' games and software with 'better support' might cost you dearly when your daughter or your girlfriend/wife gets filmed by a hacker, using your own webcam. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFS3p0emftw - "Security awareness: Filmmaker explores RAT malware, buys access to random PCs for just 15 cents a piece - made short film about his experience" Movie…

The Adwind Remote Access Trojan typically spreads by phishing e-mails.

Which is why you shouldn't believe everything you read.

By the way, this last sentence:

>Movies and other media files that don't run any scripts are ok if you're careful and know what you're doing, but installing pirated software is an invitation to get blackmailed and extored by darknet hackers.

Is entirely wrong. If you're worried about malware, you already know that it can come via video files as well as binary programs.

The rest of what you wrote is just spreading fear for notoriety's sake. Pirated software isn't an "invitation" to anything provided you have good anti-malware defenses and good security practices.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#208

Post by goatkarma » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 8:09 PM UTC

Tepix wrote: post #199

goatkarma wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think pretty much any university could provide proof that Scihub uses phished credentials to proxy articles for their users. It's no secret in HE. Here's the first Google link. It's far too alarmist but should at least give the gist. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/09/18/guest-post-th... One other point I missed that we have to often deal with : when phished accounts are used to mass-download PDFs, many pu…

Have you seen this statement straight from the owner of sci-hub: https://engineuring.wordpress.com/2017/07/02/some-facts-on-s...

Interesting link thanks! I guess the pertinent part is :

I did not tell Science how credentials were donated: either voluntarily or not. I only told that I cannot disclose the source of the credentials. I assume that some credentials coming to Sci-Hub could have been obtained by phishing.

Here's what I think possibily happens : credentials are phished, with Scihub as one of the main "customers", alongside other groups or they are put into the (semi)public domain. They are then used for other nefarious purposes by non-scihub third parties (more phishing, network access etc).

Would university accounts still be phished without Scihub? Absolutely! Would the volume be so high? I'm not so sure. Plus it still causes headaches for fellow university users of the phished account if the proxy gets blocked... especially as publisher customer services are utterly terrible and institutions could be weeks without proxy access to one of the "biggie" publishers!

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#209

Post by veddox » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 8:10 PM UTC

varelaz wrote: post #63

I understand why people like Sci-Hub, but basically it will not exist without work of journals that they scrape. If it will consist of unvalidated papers that everyone can submit it will be far less usable, it will be bloated with false research and non-science papers. I don't think that this format of work is vitable in a long term. As far as I see it should be converted to format like Apple Music, when new big play…

I would love to see Apple Music for papers. I refuse to use Sci-Hub for its blatant piracy, but the basic idea really is what academia needs! We just need to figure out how to make it legal - like the music and movie industries did.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#210

Post by improbable22 » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 8:14 PM UTC

frenchyatwork wrote: post #183

improbable22 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The norm at least in parts of physics is to update the arxiv version once the paper is accepted, with a note saying "v3: matches version to appear in XXX", with a DOI link. Where "matches" means the content, but not the journal's formatting, spelling & comma preferences, etc. (And ideally this note would also mention any substantial changes, like "new section 4 explaining..." or "derivation in 3.2 re-written, but no…

I'm curious what would happen if a new paper tried to reference previous papers published in ArXiv instead of the traditional publishers. From a strictly academic perspective, I can't think of any reason why this would be a problem, apart from the existential problem it causes for traditional publishers.

Citing papers which aren't yet published by their arxiv numbers is routine. (And, before 1991, people did the same using the author's institute's preprint numbers.) If they have appeared in a journal by the time yours is accepted by a journal, then you should add the journal info too. (Although many journals now allow you to leave the arxiv numbers as an additional part of each reference.)