Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
1–10 of 21 posts
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#2The current scientific publication model is only benefits the gatekeepers in publishing industry. It directly goes to the packet of publishing industry by ripping off the tax-payers twice with a steep price. Nowadays research institution pay high fees both for paywall and open-access. No matter you access or publish you some how give tax-payers money to these publishing industries. It has been shown the steep price is also un-justified as peer-review are done freely (for credit, not money) by science worker themselves and there are plenty of open-review and open-science projects which prove the price is not justified.
It might worth it to repeat part of my comment in [1]:
> The current business model as a whole is a legacy institution based on earlier monopoly by a charlatan named Maxwell [2]. He basically lured scientist by shiny hotels+extra packages to build the initial reputation and then monopolize the entire industry for decades. You can find a good review of this scheme from below YouTube video[3].
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29218202
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#3The current scientific publication model is only benefits the gatekeepers in publishing industry. It directly goes to the packet of publishing industry by ripping off the tax-payers twice with a steep price. Nowadays research institution pay high fees both for paywall and open-access. No matter you access or publish you some how give tax-payers money to these publishing industries. It has been shown the steep price i…
Father of Ghislaine Maxwell, no less.
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#4Why can't we have a wiki style libgen "alternative" if the only "copyright" arises from "editing" and miscellaneous efforts they put into it. Would libgen be "low quality" if it somehow had access to all research irrespective of quality?
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#5Why can't we have a wiki style libgen "alternative" if the only "copyright" arises from "editing" and miscellaneous efforts they put into it. Would libgen be "low quality" if it somehow had access to all research irrespective of quality?
The main issue is review of material, outside of being a domain expert how would an end user determine which content to trust as rigorous?
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#6Why can't we have a wiki style libgen "alternative" if the only "copyright" arises from "editing" and miscellaneous efforts they put into it. Would libgen be "low quality" if it somehow had access to all research irrespective of quality?
The main issue is review of material, outside of being a domain expert how would an end user determine which content to trust as rigorous?
how do i know from a DOI/name/title that the research is good? just "being" on the journal is more important than the details of peer reviewers and their own research? i am saying, how do you evaluate the "goodness" of a paper if you weren't told it came from Elsevier or some other publication? i am genuinely curious
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main issue is review of material, outside of being a domain expert how would an end user determine which content to trust as rigorous?
how do i know from a DOI/name/title that the research is good? just "being" on the journal is more important than the details of peer reviewers and their own research? i am saying, how do you evaluate the "goodness" of a paper if you weren't told it came from Elsevier or some other publication? i am genuinely curious
For me personally, I'm involved in academia and research so I live and breathe it. It's difficult for me to evaluate papers outside of my domain, and takes a huge amount of background research to do so.
A good first filter is usually (not always) seeing the journal its published in. The primary thing here though, is not looking for good journals but rather avoiding the known predatory ones.
My concern is for the people who don't live and breathe research. There is a massive amount of depth and detail that is easily overlooked when you're unfamiliar with the subject.
Things like poor method can invalidate results, and people unfamiliar with the particular methodology can miss that. Even the statistical analysis could be flawed, or they use a statistical method which is not appropriate for their data or study design.
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
how do i know from a DOI/name/title that the research is good? just "being" on the journal is more important than the details of peer reviewers and their own research? i am saying, how do you evaluate the "goodness" of a paper if you weren't told it came from Elsevier or some other publication? i am genuinely curious
For me personally, I'm involved in academia and research so I live and breathe it. It's difficult for me to evaluate papers outside of my domain, and takes a huge amount of background research to do so. A good first filter is usually (not always) seeing the journal its published in. The primary thing here though, is not looking for good journals but rather avoiding the known predatory ones. My concern is for the peop…
The studies published by people who are really into ESP and paranormal ideas are annoying like this.
It's an exercise in making papers that look like they have vaguely decent protocol and statistical methodology, but arrive at insane, obviously wrong results through cleverly non-obvious, intricate flaws.
Like the Underhanded Code Contests, but for research.
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#9Alexandra Elbakyan is a living example of a better human being.
Re: Sci-Hub: Researchers File Intervention Application to Fight ISP Blocking
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me personally, I'm involved in academia and research so I live and breathe it. It's difficult for me to evaluate papers outside of my domain, and takes a huge amount of background research to do so. A good first filter is usually (not always) seeing the journal its published in. The primary thing here though, is not looking for good journals but rather avoiding the known predatory ones. My concern is for the peop…
The studies published by people who are really into ESP and paranormal ideas are annoying like this. It's an exercise in making papers that look like they have vaguely decent protocol and statistical methodology, but arrive at insane, obviously wrong results through cleverly non-obvious, intricate flaws. Like the Underhanded Code Contests, but for research.
> It's an exercise in making papers that look like they have vaguely decent protocol and statistical methodology, but arrive at insane, obviously wrong results through cleverly non-obvious, intricate flaws.
What if I told you that 90% of all research findings are like that.