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

Where Sci-Hub Is

whereisscihub.now.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 185 posts

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#101

Post by mseri »

xvilka wrote: post #12
p0llard wrote: post #7

The sooner academic publishers die the better—not a very original thought, I'm aware. There's still very much a distinction between (self-)publishing on the arXiv and publishing in a 'real' journal/conference within the academic community, and I think it comes down to two factors: 1. The arXiv moderation process has a much lower bar; you see some pretty rubbish papers (often from large tech companies) make their way…

Just an arXiv with peer-review is not enough. There is a lot of room for innovation and improvement. There was quite an interesting discussion[1] about creating something in between Overleaf[2], ArXiv[3], Git, and Wikipedia, moreover with the ability to do a peer-to-peer review, discussion, and social networking. Check out the last[4] article in that series. There are a few implementations, albeit not covering all fe…

There are experiments also in terms of peer reviewed open access journals that work as arxiv overlays. In mathematics we have discrete analysis [1] and sigma [2] (at least) which are quite good. Some journals started moving to a fully free open access model, e.g. JEP [3], Documenta Mathematica [4], Acta Mathematica [5] and Annales IF [6] (again at least).

I agree with @xvilka that there is lots of room for innovation and exploration, but even in the more traditional setting there is some movement coming from the smaller realities. It seems to me that the big publisher monopoly, which at least in my field is completely unjustified, is the bigger obstacle.

[1] https://discreteanalysisjournal.com/ [2] https://www.emis.de/journals/SIGMA/ [3] https://jep.math.cnrs.fr/index.php/JEP/ [4] https://www.elibm.org/series?q=se:2204 [5] https://intlpress.com/index.php [6] https://aif.centre-mersenne.org/

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#102

Post by rhn_mk1 »

sa46 wrote: post #88
MacsHeadroom wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Information freedom radicalism is not in any way mutually exclusive with compensating creators. Grants, shareware, donationware, donation subscriptions (like patreon), crowdfunding, and the list goes on and on- of all the ways information creation is compensated prior to the information being given away for free. Copying information takes virtually no work. It's not unreasonable to hold that the concept of "intillect…

I don't follow your argument: "information creation is compensated prior to the information being given away for free." You can't give something away for free by requiring compensation beforehand.

You can make your information public and free to anyone interested under the condition that you are compensated beforehand by anyone.

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#103

Post by anonymfus »

dragonsh wrote: post #18

I am of the opinion knowledge should be free and easily accessible. Research papers through sci-hub only helps to make knowledge easily accessible. Humanity's progress depends on people who shared their knowledge, not by people who use it as a tool to rule and hold on to power. It will be nicer if whole sci-hub is able to move to IPFS network and accessible through a domain. The problem is IPFS do not offer anonymity…

> It will be nicer if whole sci-hub is able to move to IPFS network and accessible through a domain.

I think you have an misconception about how sci-hub works. Most of the content you can access trough sci-hub is not hosted by sci-hub, what happens when you request a fresh new paper is that your request is eventually served by a computer in the network of one of the universities with subscription to the journal which published that paper, using donated or stolen credentials of some high profile scientists if needed. Sci-hub already uses IPFS to cache some papers, it can not move to IPFS network because it is not a library of content like LibGen (which is often confused to) but an actual hub which decides how to serve your request in real time.

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#104

Post by cstrasen »

dragonsh wrote: post #18

I am of the opinion knowledge should be free and easily accessible. Research papers through sci-hub only helps to make knowledge easily accessible. Humanity's progress depends on people who shared their knowledge, not by people who use it as a tool to rule and hold on to power. It will be nicer if whole sci-hub is able to move to IPFS network and accessible through a domain. The problem is IPFS do not offer anonymity…

I haven't been following gnunet.org for quite a while but I remember from years ago that it offers plausible deniability for nodes, aside from solid sounding review of their crypto.

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#105

Post by Beldin »

boldlybold wrote: post #80
WilTimSon wrote: post #16

Sci-Hub is such a marvelous resource. I like to read research papers for fun sometimes but I'm, let's put it gently, no scientist. So it'd be a huge waste of money for me to pay the steep prices of scientific journal subscriptions just to read 1-2 articles per month where I understand at most 75% of it. However, I still feel bad about accessing them without any benefit to the scientific teams. Is there any way to giv…

If you enjoy a paper you read, email the first or corresponding author and say so! It would make my day if this happened to me, a PhD student. Giving back doesn't have to be monetary. A note like that could give someone the encouragement they need to finish an experiment or a draft.

This.

Paying taxes is (at least in western countries where i know a tiny bit about academia) sufficient to support the authors.

If you want to go beyond that: reach out / blog / tweet / etc about papers that peek your interest. If someone else wrote about a paper of mine, I'd be over the moon!

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#106

Post by czzr »

dionyziz wrote: post #100
unityByFreedom wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am of the opinion knowledge should be free and easily accessible. I understand hatred for academic publishers, however this argument makes no sense. It takes work to produce human knowledge. Writing a book, creating educational materials, and writing research all takes time, just like it takes time to build a house.

I'm a researcher. I write the articles in their books. They don't pay me for that. All of the articles are written by people like me. All of the articles are reviewed and edited by people like me. I even do the typesetting. I get paid by a tax-funded university. Publishers (such as Springer) use their money not to produce knowledge, but to sue people, market their conferences and journals, and pay their administrator…

Hmm... so you get nothing for it, you do all the work and yet you continue to do it?

I presume you must be getting something out of the arrangement, else why on earth do you continue?

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#107

Post by unityByFreedom »

dionyziz wrote: post #100
unityByFreedom wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am of the opinion knowledge should be free and easily accessible. I understand hatred for academic publishers, however this argument makes no sense. It takes work to produce human knowledge. Writing a book, creating educational materials, and writing research all takes time, just like it takes time to build a house.

I'm a researcher. I write the articles in their books. They don't pay me for that. All of the articles are written by people like me. All of the articles are reviewed and edited by people like me. I even do the typesetting. I get paid by a tax-funded university. Publishers (such as Springer) use their money not to produce knowledge, but to sue people, market their conferences and journals, and pay their administrator…

As I said, I understand the hatred for academic publishers. They aren't compensating authors like you, your university does that.

My comment was in response to the parent who said 'knowledge should be free'

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#108

Post by dragonsh »

anonymfus wrote: post #103
dragonsh wrote: post #18

I am of the opinion knowledge should be free and easily accessible. Research papers through sci-hub only helps to make knowledge easily accessible. Humanity's progress depends on people who shared their knowledge, not by people who use it as a tool to rule and hold on to power. It will be nicer if whole sci-hub is able to move to IPFS network and accessible through a domain. The problem is IPFS do not offer anonymity…

> It will be nicer if whole sci-hub is able to move to IPFS network and accessible through a domain. I think you have an misconception about how sci-hub works. Most of the content you can access trough sci-hub is not hosted by sci-hub, what happens when you request a fresh new paper is that your request is eventually served by a computer in the network of one of the universities with subscription to the journal which…

Thanks for clarifying it, I didn't know that it uses stored credentials to serve. Still it will be nice if there is a decentralized network storing these papers in case those journals go away or out of business.

This research papers are anyways funded indirectly and authors of this paper are not really dependent on income from these papers, but the resulting data, experiments and experience they gained while working on it. Reading these papers is only a very small step to know something, but a necessary one.

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#109

Post by layoutIfNeeded »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #43
dragonsh wrote: post #18

I am of the opinion knowledge should be free and easily accessible. Research papers through sci-hub only helps to make knowledge easily accessible. Humanity's progress depends on people who shared their knowledge, not by people who use it as a tool to rule and hold on to power. It will be nicer if whole sci-hub is able to move to IPFS network and accessible through a domain. The problem is IPFS do not offer anonymity…

> I am of the opinion knowledge should be free and easily accessible. I understand hatred for academic publishers, however this argument makes no sense. It takes work to produce human knowledge. Writing a book, creating educational materials, and writing research all takes time, just like it takes time to build a house.

And how exactly do publishers contribute to said work? Research is done by researchers; papers are written by researchers; and papers are reviewed by other researchers for free...

Re: Where Sci-Hub Is

#110

Post by saagarjha »

unityByFreedom wrote: post #81
MacsHeadroom wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't fear paywalls. I create, fund, and advocate for circumvention tools because withholding something of value that is instantly copyable and virtually free to share is morally abhorrent. It's your right to withhold information just as it would be your right to withhold water if you had the only well in town. Likewise it's my right to use information to liberate withheld information just as it would be my right t…

> It's your right to withhold information just as it would be your right to withhold water if you had the only well in town Information is like the food in my example, not the "only water supply" in yours. Leibniz and Newton independently developed calculus, for example. > you're thinking only of yourself. That's your right; take the low road if it makes you happy. It's not selfish to be compensated for your work. Au…

> It's not selfish to be compensated for your work.

As far as I'm aware, authors get very little of the compensation for the work they're doing.

> Authors can choose themselves whether they want to make some of their work freely available, just as a market can give away some food or not.

Not if the established procedure for publishing is a journal.

Post reply on HN