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

FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 272 posts

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#121

Post by jMyles »

mnd999 wrote: post #68
jMyles wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems so absolutely obvious that a jurisdiction adopting a "there is no such thing as IP" approach will have a huge advantage. What's the reason this hasn't happened?

The original purpose of copyright was to encourage people to create works. The theory being that of others can simply copy something where is the incentive to do it at all. IMHO, there’s something in that for some classes of works, so I don’t think no-IP is a good idea universally. It’s certainly questionably for scientific papers though.

I think it's very possible that this approach was historically important for promoting creativity, but I think it's more likely, on balance, to have the opposite effect as the internet matures.

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#122

Post by lanerobertlane »

scarygliders wrote: post #79
toomuchtodo wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does using DNS over HTTPS avoid this block? Edit: Thank you for the replies.

Nope. Just tried. Hard redirect to http://www.ukispcourtorders.co.uk/?JNI_URL=sci-hub.st/&JNI_R...

It's very nice of the UK Government to give a nice ordered list of pirate sites to use, as long as you take the 30 seconds required to change your DNS or use a VPN.

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#123

Post by anonuser123456 »

xNeil wrote: post #32

I'm not sure I understand the concept of paid access to scientific research, so I'd be grateful if someone with more knowledge of the topic could explain it to me. Governments fund universities, people donate large amounts of money to universities, and a large portion of the population has student debt because of how expensive tuition is. Why are they charging for access to research at these institutions then?

>and a large portion of the population has student debt because of how expensive tuition is.

Student tuition does not fund research (at least in STEM in the US). DARPA, NSF, NIH etc. fund research. Professors at research institutions are to some extent evaluated based on the the size of their research grants.

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#124

Post by libeclipse »

whatever1 wrote: post #67

Where can I file for my damages as a reviewer? I have lost more than 2000 hours reviewing papers for for-profit publishers and they never gave me a single penny. edit: Heck many of them they did not even give me free access to their journal to check references from the papers I was reviewing for them. I had to rely on SciHub to do so.

I just learned that Sci-Hub has currently "temporarily" paused uploading new papers to the site.

https://www.reddit.com/r/scihub/comments/lofj0r/announcement...

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#126

Post by refurb »

xNeil wrote: post #32

I'm not sure I understand the concept of paid access to scientific research, so I'd be grateful if someone with more knowledge of the topic could explain it to me. Governments fund universities, people donate large amounts of money to universities, and a large portion of the population has student debt because of how expensive tuition is. Why are they charging for access to research at these institutions then?

A better question to ask is - when researchers can publish anywhere (including open source journals) they choose to publish in journals with paid access.

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#127

Post by refurb »

whatever1 wrote: post #67

Where can I file for my damages as a reviewer? I have lost more than 2000 hours reviewing papers for for-profit publishers and they never gave me a single penny. edit: Heck many of them they did not even give me free access to their journal to check references from the papers I was reviewing for them. I had to rely on SciHub to do so.

Why did you volunteer you time for these for-profit entities? Couldn’t you refuse?

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#128

Post by refurb »

jMyles wrote: post #33
kingsuper20 wrote: post #27

Given the provenance of most (all?) of the material on Sci-Hub, the copyright issues here seem laughable to me. Fruitless speculation about the FBI aside, you do have to wonder about the future of IP generally in the world. There's a sort of evolutionary pressure going on right now between different countries' approach to the matter and I can't say that the US-style rules will hold (or more realistically, be imposed)…

It seems so absolutely obvious that a jurisdiction adopting a "there is no such thing as IP" approach will have a huge advantage. What's the reason this hasn't happened?

Go to most undeveloped countries and see how well having no IP works.

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#129

Post by BeetleB »

setr wrote: post #96
hollerith wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The universities aren't the ones collecting the money. In fact, they the main targets of the extortion. Most professors care mostly about prestige (reputation for being smart, wise or innovative) and would prefer to ignore or disdain the economic and legal aspects of life. OK, that is a little unfair: most profs want to focus on their specialty and sometimes don't pay enough attention to how their actions interact wi…

I think prestige is a very unfair characterization. It’s my belief that most people just want their research to be seen and engaged with by their peers (it is, of course, the fundamental purpose of producing a paper). Universities however want prestige, and enforce the policy “publish or perish”. The problem is still as you say — the only way to do so reliably is to give up your ownership to a prestigious journal (be…

> It’s my belief that most people just want their research to be seen and engaged with by their peers (it is, of course, the fundamental purpose of producing a paper). Universities however want prestige, and enforce the policy “publish or perish”.

The two are one and the same. What you call "Universities" is simply "professors at the universities". Department policies for tenure are set by a bunch of professors. The dean of the college is always a professor. There's no "us" vs "them".

Re: FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

#130

Post by crumbshot »

generalizations wrote: post #115
crumbshot wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By her own words, in creating and maintaining Sci-Hub, Elbakyan was driven by communist ideals: https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc850001 https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc920674 Interesting to observe how it overlaps with this conception of the hacker spirit. If only the world had many more Alexandra Elbakyans, and fewer Elseviers. Humanity as a whole would be a lot better off without th…

Yeah, like that horrible capitalist company that funded the research lab which invented the transistor, Unix and C. We'd be so much better off without it out its 'capitalist, profit-driven creations'. (AT&T, Bell labs) /s

Despite your unnecessary sarcasm, this is actually a good example, seeing as the company was eventually destroyed by the US government for abusing its monopoly position.

They did indeed fund a highly successful research centre, but - importantly to its success - one that wasn't run with the same ideals as its parent. It wasn't Bell Labs itself that endeavoured to monopolise an entire industry to the point where the government had to intervene.

Post reply on HN