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

A World Without Sci-Hub

palladiummag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 206 posts

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#31

Post by nine_k »

frankling_ wrote: post #12

The main issue is that currently there's no way around publishing at the established journals and conferences, because of the reputation they've built up. Funding and career advancement hinge on publications in these venues. If we accept that publishers don't offer much at all in return for the publication fees/library subscription costs (barely any editing, reviewers work pro bono, hosting PDFs is very cheap nowaday…

I thought that the point of journals is review and filtering, their selectively, I thought, is their value proposition over arxiv.org.

Am I mistaken?

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#32

Post by refurb »

jf wrote: post #2

What are pragmatic things that we can do to push for open access for academic papers?

Tell authors to publish in open access journals?

Oh right, they don’t want to because they aren’t as prestigious.

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#33

Post by frankling_ »

nine_k wrote: post #31
frankling_ wrote: post #12

The main issue is that currently there's no way around publishing at the established journals and conferences, because of the reputation they've built up. Funding and career advancement hinge on publications in these venues. If we accept that publishers don't offer much at all in return for the publication fees/library subscription costs (barely any editing, reviewers work pro bono, hosting PDFs is very cheap nowaday…

I thought that the point of journals is review and filtering, their selectively, I thought, is their value proposition over arxiv.org. Am I mistaken?

What I'm proposing is to convince the same people that currently take care of the reviewing and selection process for an established journal to do the same thing for an open and independent variant of the same journal, which is run alongside the original journal.

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#34

Post by adminscoffee »

frankling_ wrote: post #33
nine_k wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that the point of journals is review and filtering, their selectively, I thought, is their value proposition over arxiv.org. Am I mistaken?

What I'm proposing is to convince the same people that currently take care of the reviewing and selection process for an established journal to do the same thing for an open and independent variant of the same journal, which is run alongside the original journal.

good idea

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#35

Post by mdp2021 »

joeberon wrote: post #11
blaeks wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine the live map of the money-flow around the research/review/publishing/usage. It could give us some hints. Pain becomes palpable If one think about it. Maybe some thermodynamically provable illustrations of the energy around the issue would help us illustrate the problem (read: the scale of sickness of the 'intellectual property') My hunch is that we're at the stage where KWh could - and should be used as the u…

This is completely incomprehensible

(I think it meant) "If you visualize the monetary flow in the article publishing business, the "sickness" involved («pain») becomes visible: the energy waste becomes so apparent that it suggests replacing money directly with energy".

Concept that its author wanted to stress by crafting an energy consuming post.

(Joeberon, you never had to extensively decrypt the texts of theoretical philosophers of the latest centuries, had you ;) )

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#36

Post by quantum_magpie »

refurb wrote: post #32
jf wrote: post #2

What are pragmatic things that we can do to push for open access for academic papers?

Tell authors to publish in open access journals? Oh right, they don’t want to because they aren’t as prestigious.

We don't want to because publishing in open access costs us $2000.

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#37

Post by nivenkos »

xorfish wrote: post #17
mettamage wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's things like this that make me believe that the US isn't a truly free society. It simply pretends it is. But all nations have their problems. The US simply has more than one might think.

The US has the highest prison population per capita in the world. Mostly because of an outdated view on justice and crime.

It's good for violent crimes though.

Whereas in Sweden for example, a violent rapist was awarded ~$84k - https://www.gp.se/ledare/v%C3%A5ldt%C3%A4ktsmannens-skadest%... - after he turned out to be a minor but had been tried as an adult, and in the end spent less than 2 years in prison.

Some of ThePirateBay founders had longer sentences, absolute clown world.

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#38

Post by stuartbman »

frankling_ wrote: post #12

The main issue is that currently there's no way around publishing at the established journals and conferences, because of the reputation they've built up. Funding and career advancement hinge on publications in these venues. If we accept that publishers don't offer much at all in return for the publication fees/library subscription costs (barely any editing, reviewers work pro bono, hosting PDFs is very cheap nowaday…

Most journals are hybrid now, and offer a choice when publishing- either it's free for the author but kept behind a paywall, or the author pays up front. The article processing charges are really expensive- BMJ is £3,500, Lancet $5000, Cell $5,200 etc, although some major funders have arranged 'site licenses' with publishers so that all their funded research can be published open access without charge to the scientist.

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#39

Post by conz »

quantum_magpie wrote: post #36
refurb wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell authors to publish in open access journals? Oh right, they don’t want to because they aren’t as prestigious.

We don't want to because publishing in open access costs us $2000.

  We don't want to because publishing in open access costs us $2000.
Out of curiosity, what does publishing in closed-access journals cost?

Re: A World Without Sci-Hub

#40

Post by mandmandam »

mettamage wrote: post #6
NmAmDa wrote: post #3

"Swartz potentially faced more jail time for downloading academic papers than he would have if he had helped Al Qaeda build a nuclear weapon. " Too much for the American values.

It's things like this that make me believe that the US isn't a truly free society. It simply pretends it is. But all nations have their problems. The US simply has more than one might think.

More than an American might think maybe.

The rest of the world sees America as the numero uno threat to democracy, peace, and stability.

And when that fact is pointed out to Americans, with evidence and polls and sources, it makes no impression somehow (in my experience). It's simply incompatible with their programming, and the data is rejected.

Try it.

Post reply on HN