Earlier quoted context omitted.
IPFS would be perfect for distributing this, if it worked well.
Stay tuned. Something’s cooking.
What is?
Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
231–240 of 280 posts
Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#232Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#233Don't worry Alexandra. Twitter are just jealous because their platform is just a toy for imbeciles to shout inanities on the internet. Very few websites can claim to have achieved more good for the world than sci-hub.
Alexandra for the Nobel peace price! The opportunities she creates to do good in society are unmatched. No sarcasm. Seriously, we should make it happen.
Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#234Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#235Hackernews comments were generally onboard with Twitter banning Trump for controversial tweets that can be considered as incitement. As much as I like Sci-Hub, it is clearly a service that disregards and breaches copyright. If you advocate for Twitter exercising a heavy hand on greyer areas (Trump), you shouldn’t be surprised when they do the same for clear breaches of their TOS/Laws (SciHub). It scares me that these…
"First they came for Trump, and I didn't care because I hated him anyway..."
Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
> scientists Not only scientists need sci-hub. Educators need sci-hub. People writing education content. Or trying to understand existing content, steeped in misconceptions. Students. A science-literate public. When I hobby work on OER science education content, or even when I answer a "ask a science/history/whatever question" on reddit, I use google scholar, open access. and sci-hub . And "I'd really like to see pap…
> Students. A science-literate public. It's crazy to me that so many students don't know about sci-hub because educators are careful not to mention it in any official settings, but from more private settings it's apparent that _everyone_ is using it. This also sometimes leads to (small?) differences in academic performance, where the sci-hub-oblivious students can't factor in a highly-relevant paywalled article in e.…
In my university my student library account gave me access to journals so even though scihub didn't exist then I don't recall ever not being able to access a paper. I assumed all universities do this, is that not the case?
Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The way to "beat" piracy is to consider it as a competitor... I hope it's not too tangential, but I think of economics and politics the same way: XYZ-ism is good you say? ABC-ism is bad? Sure, grow your XYZ-ism naturally, go for the bootstraps. If it's more awesome it should be more efficient and productive, people should choose it naturally, happily, and calmly in their own best interest without coercion or propag…
what's a monopoly?
In this context, in my personal opinion and world view?
A monopoly is MAGLIGNANT FUCKING TERATOMA!
Excuse my emphasis and emotion, but that's the best analogy I can come up with.
Unless of course you want an economic or dictionary definition, but I don't think that's what you were asking.
Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that was true we would not have any physics journals and many math journals. We'd just have people peer reviewing arXiv. Peer review is a lot more complicated than people think to find the right reviewers, minimize conflicts of interest, prodding reviewers, reviewing their reports. Also having editors read submissions first to see if it is even worth sending to peer review. This costs money and is not free. And it…
> This costs money and is not free I have been a reviewer at Elsevier, Science and many of this journals for a better of the decade. I personally know the editors of many journals including IEEE, ACM, Elsevier, Science etc. They don't get paid for their time. So yeah, the scientists voluntarily review for free. Most journals only archive and index, they do not do anything more than it.
I do not know the case of every editor for all journals. Just sharing my direct knowledge as an employee of a large not for profit society. We did indeed pre pandemic have ~100 editors coming in the office not for free. THey now work remote not for free along with others around the world that are paid.
Here are our financials it is public. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/131...
Not you but just in general sometimes HN is hard if you post an observation or direct experience that is not in the hivemind. You get downvoted for things even though they are well reasoned and true. I personally don't care if journals get disrupted there are indeed a lot of problems. I work in tech, I will have another job tomorrow. I was just making the point that we don't just have free scientists doing work and then upload PDFs to the internet and charge for them. If that was the case we could have journals for a few hundred dollars a month rather than the 10s of millions we spend. I also too think we are honest, do good work, are thrifty, and provide a good service.
Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#239At some point we need to stop the hypocrisy, recognize that SciHub is too valuable to the community to be shut down, and fix laws so that it becomes either legal or useless. That's no easy task, but it's much better than having scientists from all over the world rely on it while simultaneously pretending they are dangerous criminals.
SciHub doesn't have value so much as Elsevier has "anti-value". Scihub is a space without the negative effect of Elsevier gatekeeping, thus seeming to have a net positive effect. Instead of doing anything at all with SciHub, we should instead fight Elsevier. First blow should be on the basis that Elsevier is anti-competitive, by the logic that if wasn't there would be no reason for it to succeed at all. Second blow s…
Second blow should be a that any partially federal funded work would be required to be publicly available
Federal agencies with research expenditures greater than than $100 million annually (which covers most federally funded research) are required to make publications they fund publicly available. This press release links to the executive order, which is still in force: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2013/02/22/expandi....
The policy allows journals to generally have a one-year embargo, and agencies are allowed some latitude in how they implement the order, but most new federally funded research should become freely available on places like PubMed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) after embargoes expire.
Re: Sci-Hub Founder Criticizes Sudden Twitter Ban over “Counterfeit” Content
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Students. A science-literate public. It's crazy to me that so many students don't know about sci-hub because educators are careful not to mention it in any official settings, but from more private settings it's apparent that _everyone_ is using it. This also sometimes leads to (small?) differences in academic performance, where the sci-hub-oblivious students can't factor in a highly-relevant paywalled article in e.…
In my university my student library account gave me access to journals so even though scihub didn't exist then I don't recall ever not being able to access a paper. I assumed all universities do this, is that not the case?
You are fortunate to go to a university that can afford the large and increasing costs of bulk journal subscriptions.