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

Sci-Hub statistics and database

sci-hub.ru

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 150 posts

Re: Sci-Hub statistics and database

#61

Post by sa1 »

Ansil849 wrote: post #55
joshuaissac wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also don't understand why the Indian court case has any impact on new article availability. The owner is not Indian. The servers and domains are not Indian. Because Sci-Hub has a good chance of winning the case. The court in question has previously backed a very broad definition of what constitutes fair dealing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Oxford_v._Rame...

> Because Sci-Hub has a good chance of winning the case. I understand that this is the party line that is parroted whenever this issue comes up, but it does not make any sense as a rationale for keeping new articles off the site. How is not adding any new articles (but, for example, keeping old articles accessible) assisting the possible winning of the case? And more to the point, why does it matter at all if it wins…

The owner might not be Indian, but she's actively defending the case(through lawyers) in India. Not following the injunction would lead her to losing the case, which is why she followed through. She didn't have to fight the case in India, but she chose to. Why keep old papers and stop adding new papers - that probably depends on the terms of the injunction.

Re: Sci-Hub statistics and database

#62

Post by gumby »

logifail wrote: post #57
gumby wrote: post #52

100 TB is pretty small. I wonder if she will start torrenting it so people can back it up and share the load.

> 100 TB is pretty small. I wonder if she will start torrenting it so people can back it up and share the load This has been ongoing for a while now: Rescue Mission for Sci-Hub and Open Science: We are the library https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/nc27fv/rescue_...

Excellent, thanks!

Re: Sci-Hub statistics and database

#64

Post by Ansil849 »

sa1 wrote: post #61
Ansil849 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because Sci-Hub has a good chance of winning the case. I understand that this is the party line that is parroted whenever this issue comes up, but it does not make any sense as a rationale for keeping new articles off the site. How is not adding any new articles (but, for example, keeping old articles accessible) assisting the possible winning of the case? And more to the point, why does it matter at all if it wins…

The owner might not be Indian, but she's actively defending the case(through lawyers) in India. Not following the injunction would lead her to losing the case, which is why she followed through. She didn't have to fight the case in India, but she chose to. Why keep old papers and stop adding new papers - that probably depends on the terms of the injunction.

> Why keep old papers and stop adding new papers - that probably depends on the terms of the injunction.

As per the official tweet that has already been mentioned in this thread [1]:

> how about the lawsuit in India you may ask: our lawyers say that restriction is expired already

So according to the owner's official Twitter, this is no longer a valid reason, and yet new papers are still not accessible. Why is that?

[1] https://mobile.twitter.com/ringo_ring/status/143435621720862...

Re: Sci-Hub statistics and database

#67

Post by generationP »

Ansil849 wrote: post #46
joshuaissac wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had resumed adding articles after receiving legal advice that the Delhi High Court injunction only applied for a few months. https://mobile.twitter.com/ringo_ring/status/143435621720862...

I saw that tweet, but it doesn't change the material reality: try plugging in some DOIs from recent article from the last year, and they will not be there. Scihub used to be a great resource, now it's only a resource for old research. Still useful for background material, but not for current work. I also don't understand why the Indian court case has any impact on new article availability. The owner is not Indian. Th…

I have a hunch that the downfall of the "Plato" real-time downloader wasn't the Indian court case but rather the fact that it helped publishers trivially identify the university accounts through which the downloads were happening. Even if the appearance of papers were delayed by a random number of days, there are other pitfalls now, and most importantly, publishers started caring. In particular, Elsevier now slaps UUIDs onto all PDFs you download from them, and no, I'm not just talking of visible watermarks. Other publishers seem to be doing similar things (there was a recent twitter thread on this, retweeted by @textfiles, which I can't find). The rational solution for Sci-Hub seems to be to buffer their uploads and release them in yearly batches, maybe programmatically removing various kinds of watermarks and diffing against the same paper downloaded from a second IP. If this is what they are doing, I'm not surprised. Not sure how much of a winning strategy they have in the long run, though.

Guys: post your papers on the arXiv.

Re: Sci-Hub statistics and database

#68

Post by OmicronCeti »

slater wrote: post #25
2Gkashmiri wrote: post #18

i asked this question here and at many places before. why do people "rely" on an organization that sifts through hundreds of thousands of papers and then charge exorbitant prices for providing this service? if we use the amazon analogy, is amazon with millions of products worse than a boutique cat food seller that specializes in a specific cat food for a specific cat breed? maybe. but what about the "rest" of product…

There's some truth to "publish or perish". Scientists are expected to publish in prestigious journals.

A typical PhD dissertation these days is 3 publications in high-quality journals. It is explicitly required at most schools.

Re: Sci-Hub statistics and database

#69

Post by sa1 »

Ansil849 wrote: post #64
sa1 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The owner might not be Indian, but she's actively defending the case(through lawyers) in India. Not following the injunction would lead her to losing the case, which is why she followed through. She didn't have to fight the case in India, but she chose to. Why keep old papers and stop adding new papers - that probably depends on the terms of the injunction.

> Why keep old papers and stop adding new papers - that probably depends on the terms of the injunction. As per the official tweet that has already been mentioned in this thread [1]: > how about the lawsuit in India you may ask: our lawyers say that restriction is expired already So according to the owner's official Twitter, this is no longer a valid reason, and yet new papers are still not accessible. Why is that? […

Haven't got around to adding yet?

Re: Sci-Hub statistics and database

#70

Post by dagw »

roywiggins wrote: post #22
nefitty wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Watson does something like this.

It didn't seem to actually work though. https://slate.com/technology/2022/01/ibm-watson-health-failu...

Did Watson fail because they where bad at their job or because the problem is much harder than people assumed?
Post reply on HN