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

How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

engineuring.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 174 posts

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#91

Post by uniqueid »

worik wrote: post #65
uniqueid wrote: post #20

I have a superstition: I don't see a robust future for Sci-Hub, Internet Archive or Wikipedia. The internet relentlessly turns everything into worthless trash, so Sci-Hub will die, Internet Archive will wind up with Doritos ads and a paywall, and Wikipedia will focus on sponsored articles and deprecate, in one way or another, articles that aren't commercial.

What is your time frame for this? Internet Archive has been around since 1996 and Wikipedia 2001 (ish)

I don't have a time frame for it. I just know that 'this is useful' historically doesn't save an online service (Napster, Ebay, Amazon, Reddit, Twitter, Google Search, etc) from disappearing or turning lousy. The fact that millions of people love Internet Archive and Wikipedia means there's money to made by ruining them.

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#93

Post by eplanit »

She started off with a decent explanation and defense of her work... but then fell off completely with the complaints about the photo and the worries about getting 100% credit. I don't know if it's due to the pressures she faces, or if that was her personality to begin with.

Was gaining fame part of her goal?

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#94

Post by nicolas_t »

lovasoa wrote: post #15

The original article presents her in a very bright light, as a smart and brave woman who is engaged in a legal battle against large greedy corporations. And I find the photo quite cool. I think she is just overly susceptible, and maybe a little bit paranoid (which is understandable for a person with enemies as powerful as hers). This reminds me of the time when a russian entomologist named a new wasp species he disco…

I'm not sure about the entomologist issue but for this article, I feel that some of the issue might be language barrier and cultural misunderstanding.

For example, she mentions this paragraph: > She said that while she gets some help, Sci-Hub remains pretty much a one-woman show (it’s “mainly me,” she said) The Chronicle of Higher Education

And criticises it by saying: > So they lie to their readers that Sci-Hub run by a woman is some kind of not a real thing but a ‘show’ , and to support this, they seize upon a word ‘mainly’ that I have used to describe my work, as a proof that I am not doing this myself, but getting helped instead.

The use of show in this context is normal and typical language usage, but she instead tries to ascribe the literal meaning to the word 'show' and is offended by it. No native English speaker would interpret "one-woman show" as meaning "Sci-Hub run by a woman is some kind of not a real thing but a ‘show’ ".

So combine a thin skin due to numerous attack, a good command of English but no mastery of the subtleties of certain words and expressions and you have a recipe for her to seem overly susceptible.

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#95

Post by pwinnski »

worik wrote: post #58
phire wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And usually has positive connotations. Most of the time you use the "one-woman show" idiom is when you are impressed that one person does this by themselves.

And there is the sexist assumption that there must be a bloke some place doing the actual work.

There is not, though. No native speaker of English, which the newspaper of record in Houston, Texas, might be forgiven for assuming make up its primary readership, would ever assume that anything described as a "one-man show" must have a woman hidden away doing all of the behind-the-scenes work.

The idiom means "the work of a single person," and that's it. Nothing else.

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#96

Post by phone8675309 »

pessimizer wrote: post #82
tokai wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is getting a bit embarrassing. Wished she disregarded things about her person. All kind of stuff is going to be said and written about you when your a globally known person. Better, and healthier, to focus on defending the cause and not yourself.

> All kind of stuff is going to be said and written about you when your a globally known person. There are powerful people who would be happy to imprison or kill her. It's weird to call a revolutionary who is in the spotlight paranoid. A couple of administration changes and a sex or bribery scandal in some place she's never even visited could set off a series of events where she ends up like Assange or worse.

> There are powerful people who would be happy to imprison or kill her.

Imprison? Sure. I’ll even grant you "financially ruined" from lawsuits, but who wants her dead?

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#97

Post by Karunamon »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #44
nix23 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>and she took offense because the wasp was a parasite species, and blocked sci-hub in Russia for several months in retaliation Sounds like shes the wrong person in charge of sci-hub. Blocking access to ~free knowledge because one is offended is probably even worse...that's the mindset of dictators no? And Russia is probably her only protection not being assange'd already.

Feel free to run your own Sci-Hub, then. It's not like this is a massively collaborative project that she's the executive decision-maker of; it's largely just her.

A lot of the benefit of a site like this is moot if entire countries are banned for petty reasons. Imagine if the US was blocked because she didn't like the former president.

And, quite honestly, speaking about rights in the context of what amounts to a piracy site is kinda ironic.

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#98

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

austhrow743 wrote: post #31
lovasoa wrote: post #15

The original article presents her in a very bright light, as a smart and brave woman who is engaged in a legal battle against large greedy corporations. And I find the photo quite cool. I think she is just overly susceptible, and maybe a little bit paranoid (which is understandable for a person with enemies as powerful as hers). This reminds me of the time when a russian entomologist named a new wasp species he disco…

I was surprised reading the Chronicle article after her own post. If it hadn't been from the archive.org link I would have been certain they went back and added "Elbakyan, who is originally from Kazakhstan, has a bachelor’s degree in computer science and coded Sci-Hub herself." after she complained but nope, there all the time. Also "Pirate Queen"? "beloved outlaw"? They couldn't have made her sound cooler if they tr…

I think she is trying hard to be respectable, i don't think she is trying to be just cool.

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#99

Post by wizzwizz4 »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #98
austhrow743 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was surprised reading the Chronicle article after her own post. If it hadn't been from the archive.org link I would have been certain they went back and added "Elbakyan, who is originally from Kazakhstan, has a bachelor’s degree in computer science and coded Sci-Hub herself." after she complained but nope, there all the time. Also "Pirate Queen"? "beloved outlaw"? They couldn't have made her sound cooler if they tr…

I think she is trying hard to be respectable, i don't think she is trying to be just cool.

The author of Sci-Hub doesn't need to try hard to be respectable.

Re: How The Chronicle is trying to malign Sci-Hub

#100

Post by wizzwizz4 »

Karunamon wrote: post #97
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feel free to run your own Sci-Hub, then. It's not like this is a massively collaborative project that she's the executive decision-maker of; it's largely just her.

A lot of the benefit of a site like this is moot if entire countries are banned for petty reasons. Imagine if the US was blocked because she didn't like the former president. And, quite honestly, speaking about rights in the context of what amounts to a piracy site is kinda ironic.

It was less than a week, and I don't think it's happened more than once. If you just consider uptime, Sci-Hub is doing pretty well.
Post reply on HN