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

Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

nasdaq.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 414 posts

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#151

Post by bonoboTP »

jquery wrote: post #80
marvin wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're inching closer to realizing the "reductio ad absurdum" of censorship. Someone actually got censored, and took "well, if you don't like how the DNS does things, you can just make your own!" as a literal challenge. Wonder if this will eventually lead to further fragmentation. Hopefully encryption will keep it out of the lowest levels of infrastructure, I'd hate to see separate fiber lines put down to share contro…

I wonder if the author of xkcd is ever going to apologize for his comic on free speech.

Why would he? I think he's even more convinced of it today. "Free speech" is a pretty right-wing issue nowadays and people assume it's a dog whistle for hate speech. If you want to be a progressive leftist like Randall Munroe, you can't advocate for free speech without hurting your reputation in the current environment.

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#152

Post by breck »

MacsHeadroom wrote: post #129
llcoolv wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, my interpretation of his actions is also way more moderate.

His actions in the JSTOR situation were ultimately deemed lawful. But, without passing judgement one way or the other, Aaron's beliefs about free speech and information freedom which informed his activism cannot be reasonably described as moderate.

> cannot be reasonably described as moderate.

I would agree with this. I knew Aaron, at least in terms of our mutual involvement in the intellectual freedom movement, and worked with him on various things (though not well, I was a pretty shitty python coder back then).

His positions, like mine, were definitely in the "extreme", in the sense that 99% of people either 1) don't agree that we should abolish copyright and patents OR don't have an opinion on it.

But there can be a negative connotation to the word "extreme" that I don't think applies here. Our stance is extreme in the sense that the Internet was extreme in the 1970's, or the Web extreme in the 1990's, or civil rights extreme in the 1950's, or women's right to vote extreme in the 1920's.

Another way to put it: he was far ahead of our time on issues of justice.

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#153

Post by raxxorrax »

obblekk wrote: post #38

I’m supportive of free distribution of scientific knowledge, BUT HN has a significant bias against believing in the power of legal systems. No matter how good the technology, it can eventually be censored if the law is strong enough. In the past, it was hard to separate “useful” internet activity from “illegitimate” because things were changing quickly. Today, a government might say its simply illegal to use end to e…

Legal systems failed often on internet topics and does so again. DMCA comes to mind. It arguably doesn't serve any constructive purpose. Some artist have been made believe they need giant content rights holders.

I don't think any government could disallow end-to-end encryption at this point. I think they are careful because it could seriously undermine their authority if they fail, which they very likely would, which would lead to severe embarrassment.

They could still do significant damage of course.

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#154

Post by fjabre »

freeone3000 wrote: post #74
fjabre wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully with Dems in control we will see these companies punished for their bad behavior. Or at least laws passed that make the publication of research more open. The science should be funded and free. The applications of the science are where the money is to be made. These companies are unnecessary dinosaurs from a bygone era. It's time for them to fail and die off naturally. But it will probably take legislation…

Democrats are politicians with listed policies, not faeries that grant wishes because you happen to be more aligned with them. Elimination of copyright isn't on their to-do list.

Who said anything about elimination of copyright? Who said I was more aligned with 'them' ?

Most scientific research is funded with grants and by universities with billion dollar endowments. They are not struggling.

You should not make money on the deaths of others because you think it's more important to charge for the knowledge that can save them.

I'm in medical. Some of these papers are life saving. Please don't discount how valuable that science is to humanity as a whole.

This is not about companies making profit. This is about science and the freedom of information. Data wants to be free and it should be.

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#155

Post by teekert »

azernik wrote: post #127
walrus01 wrote: post #21

People have been trying to make alternative DNS name systems and alternative root nameservers a thing for 20+ years now. Has never caught on. On the other hand I 100% endorse sci-hub having a presence as a tor service.

I am continually shocked that sci-hub still does not have a working .onion address.

Hmm, this [0] used to work for me but doesn't load atm. What happened to it? Wikipedia also mentions a or website (without an address).

[0]: scihub22266oqcxt.onion

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#156

Post by eternalban »

tweetle_beetle wrote: post #90
eternalban wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The word you are looking for is 'directory'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telephone_directory

> A telephone directory, commonly called a telephone book, telephone address book, phone book "Phone[ ]book" is the 12th word on the page you linked, and described there as a synonym to "directory". There's no need to be that pedantic.

It is not "pedantic", rather literate, to note the word directory instead of grasping for DNS.

"A telephone book was a directory for telephone numbers" is clear and accurate. Unless knowing what the word "directory" means is asserted to be the domain of pedants.

"By providing a worldwide, distributed directory service, the Domain Name System has been an essential component of the functionality of the Internet since 1985."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#157

Post by lazyant »

llcoolv wrote: post #6

It is worth noting that this is exactly what Aaron Swartz was bullied to his tragic death 8 years and a day ago. May he rest in peace. And kudos to Alexandra. P.S. Corrected the date, seems like I still live in 2020. Thank you, lazyant.

8 years ago

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#158

Post by zozbot234 »

fjabre wrote: post #46
acdha wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elsevier and Wiley have a lot of lawyers who are likely arguing that leaving it up is condoning copyright infringement. There’s a long history of threats for anything related to targets of these lawsuits, and other companies taking something offline quickly to avoid being caught in the crossfire.

Hopefully with Dems in control we will see these companies punished for their bad behavior. Or at least laws passed that make the publication of research more open. The science should be funded and free. The applications of the science are where the money is to be made. These companies are unnecessary dinosaurs from a bygone era. It's time for them to fail and die off naturally. But it will probably take legislation…

The Democrats are on Big Media's side even more so than the Republicans. Hoping that they're going to switch sides and "punish" big copyright and Media owners for their IP trolling and abuse is just wishful thinking.

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#159

Post by lazzlazzlazz »

emacdona wrote: post #22
oefrha wrote: post #5

> “The DNS is like a phonebook for the internet. The addresses in the phonebook are the server IP addresses. DNS was created to give IP addresses human-readable names so with our platform, you’re finding the IP address through Handshake, not through a certificate authority ,” Namebase CEO Tieshun Roquerre told CoinDesk. (Emphasis mine.) Did this Namebase CEO just state on record that he doesn’t know how DNS works?

Followed by this: 'Handshake is “is effectively a decentralized domain name server,” Roquerre said.' -- thus implying that DNS is NOT decentralized? The article is pretty bad. For his sake, I hope they are taking his quotes out of context. Because I had a quick look at https://www.namebase.io/ -- and it does look interesting. It appears that they have decentralized the REGISTRY by putting it on the "Handshake" blockc…

DNS is not decentralized in the sense that matters for censorship, which is the most important sense in this discussion. I don't know anyone who believes DNS is suitably decentralized to resist censorship.

Re: Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

#160

Post by Technically »

d3nj4l wrote: post #143
ErikVandeWater wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit has conveniently left him out of their about page, despite being a cofounder: https://www.redditinc.com/ About Aaron: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

And they've explained this multiple times. Aaron was given the title of co-founder, but he joined well after the site had launched, and then proceeded to go AWOL and not work for months until he was fired. Given that he was only very briefly involved in the site, it doesn't make sense to call him a co-founder, even if that was his de jure title. E: At the same time, I feel like I should state - Aaron Swartz was a mar…

I don't know why the term is so valuable. Musk went so far as to buy the title for Tesla.
Post reply on HN