81–90 of 196 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a link or example for, uh, science? Lol
Google sci hub telegram bot returns me @scihubbot as the first results. You might want to try it out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the background link. I did not know about that and it's a good incentive to donate them some money for the legal battle. TL;DR of the link: No more uploads to support a court case in India which SciHub might win and thus establish a legal basis for operation in the biggest democracy.
Sci-hub is such a great example of a clear and compelling use-case for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is censorship-resistant money that doesn't rely on countries, laws, central bankers or politicians. The US dollar cannot be used for purposes not aligned with the US government. Sometimes ideas that the US Government doesn't agree with can be useful (e.g. Wikileaks, Sci-hub.) When I hear complaints that Bitcoin has no use except f…
By the way, Sci-Hub has stopped adding new articles to the database for a few months now (background: https://www.reddit.com/r/scihub/comments/mk46x4/scihub_v_els... ). It would be great to develop a truly decentralised solution. Having a database of individual torrent links for each paper might be a start.
Millions of individual torrents is not a great solution. Keeping them all seeded is basically impossible unless they run a seed for each one, at which point they might as well just host the files. Plus you'll never get the economy of scale that makes BitTorrent really shine. When you have a whole lot of tiny files that people will generally only want one or two of there isn't much better than a plain old website. A t…
With the addition of hashsums (even MD5 ad SHA1, though longer and more robust hashsums are preferred), a pretty reliable archive of content can be made. It's a curious case where increased legibility seems to be breaking rather than creating a gatekeeper monopoly.
I've been interested in the notion of more reliable content-based identifiers or fingerprints themselves, though I've found little reliable reference on this. Ngram tuples of 4-5 words are often sufficient to identify a work, particularly if a selection of several are made. Aggreeing on which tuples to use, how many, and how to account for potential noise / variations (special characters, whitespace variance, OCR inaccuracy) is also a stumbling point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, due to allocation of property rights. Cease to supply this system with the fruits of your research labors.
> Cease to supply this system with the fruits of your research labors. Historically academics have felt forced to support this system, because for-profit journals are the high-prestige ones they must publish in in order to get tenure. This has changed for certain fields, but it isn’t as simple as just suggesting that one publish elsewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that essentially mapreduce? Either way, interesting and I'd love to see the link.
I believe this is the project mentioned https://github.com/lmatteis/torrent-net
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, due to allocation of property rights. Cease to supply this system with the fruits of your research labors.
> Cease to supply this system with the fruits of your research labors. Historically academics have felt forced to support this system, because for-profit journals are the high-prestige ones they must publish in in order to get tenure. This has changed for certain fields, but it isn’t as simple as just suggesting that one publish elsewhere.
The way SciHub is being treated by governments is pretty infuriating. There's a tiny minority of people who have an interest in keeping SciHub off the internet, and they're generally neither the researchers who write the papers, nor those who want to read them. Despite this, the power of the state has been used repeatedly to keep SciHub inaccessible and limit their ability to get funding.
Yes, due to allocation of property rights. Cease to supply this system with the fruits of your research labors.
The property rights in question are not natural rights, nor material rights. Sufficient political will seems like it could do it.
Finding politicians in power who will support human progress before profits might be hard! [/understatement]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It still amazes me that 77TB is considered "small". Isn't that still in the $500-$1,000 range of non-redundant storage? Or if hosted on AWS, isn't that almost $1,900 a month if no one accesses it? I know it's not Big Data(tm) big data, but it is a lot of data for something that can generate no revenue.
I'm prepared to accept " does generate no revenue" but " can generate no revenue" ...? Perhaps some sort of MTurk or captcha-like tasks per access? Patr[e]ons? Donation drives? Micro-payments? Something else??
The way SciHub is being treated by governments is pretty infuriating. There's a tiny minority of people who have an interest in keeping SciHub off the internet, and they're generally neither the researchers who write the papers, nor those who want to read them. Despite this, the power of the state has been used repeatedly to keep SciHub inaccessible and limit their ability to get funding.
Yes, due to allocation of property rights. Cease to supply this system with the fruits of your research labors.