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

The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

blogs.lse.ac.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 247 posts

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#41

Post by goatkarma »

One thing that is often overlooked is method that Scihub uses to obtain articles, and the impact that method has on the very researchers who use it.

Phishing scams are used to obtain the credentials of university accounts which are then used via a proxy on Scihub to obtain the requested article (it's quite clever..they seem to often silently proxy institution's Ezproxy with the phished credentials) . The same credentials given to Scihub are often not just used by Scihub, and are then used for further phishing or hacking by other third parties, causing harm to the phishing victim.

Having said that, library software providers and journal platforms should be looking at Scihub and learning from it. Users want an easy to use platform with minimal fuss or hoops to jump through.

Of course, this is just a tiny piece of the much larger problem of the rotten unsustainable commercial journal publishing ecosystem..

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#42

Post by Calloutman »

dna_polymerase wrote: post #38
Calloutman wrote: post #13

I have a PhD in physics. I have zero problem with anyone downloading any of my papers from scihub. My publishers paid me nothing, and also paid the academics who peer reviewed my paper nothing. If I had stayed in academia (I didn't partially because of the toxic nature of publishing) I would also have been expected to peer review other journals for free. Information should be free access information general, but publ…

Personally I don’t see the quid pro quo nature of peer review (you review in return for your stuff being reviewed) as a problem. But I dislike the fact that the publishers limit access to something that others provided without compensation. Seriously their subscription models are outrageous, nothing they provide alongside the actual content makes it worth it.

You're still providing a valuable service for free. Why can't everyone get paid?

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#43

Post by matsemann »

goatkarma wrote: post #41

One thing that is often overlooked is method that Scihub uses to obtain articles, and the impact that method has on the very researchers who use it. Phishing scams are used to obtain the credentials of university accounts which are then used via a proxy on Scihub to obtain the requested article (it's quite clever..they seem to often silently proxy institution's Ezproxy with the phished credentials) . The same credent…

Is this FUD or do you have anything to back this up with?

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#44

Post by mschuster91 »

Calloutman wrote: post #42
dna_polymerase wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I don’t see the quid pro quo nature of peer review (you review in return for your stuff being reviewed) as a problem. But I dislike the fact that the publishers limit access to something that others provided without compensation. Seriously their subscription models are outrageous, nothing they provide alongside the actual content makes it worth it.

You're still providing a valuable service for free. Why can't everyone get paid?

Reviewers are getting paid from the university, as are the paper authors. The problem is that the journals exploit the taxpayers and grant providers.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#45

Post by matsemann »

foolfoolz wrote: post #3

if most experiments can’t be replicated how important are these papers on sci hub?

If anything, it's better to be able to read the actual paper than someone else's reporting on it. Far too often mainstream news prints "Eat X to cure Y". Having access to the paper one can better see if the claims are even worth considering.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#46

Post by gewa »

azangru wrote: post #35
Calloutman wrote: post #13

I have a PhD in physics. I have zero problem with anyone downloading any of my papers from scihub. My publishers paid me nothing, and also paid the academics who peer reviewed my paper nothing. If I had stayed in academia (I didn't partially because of the toxic nature of publishing) I would also have been expected to peer review other journals for free. Information should be free access information general, but publ…

> I have a PhD in physics. I have zero problem with anyone downloading any of my papers from scihub. Out of curiosity: why don't you just host your papers on your website then - or, if you do, why don't you think it's enough?

Im not sure if it's legally flawless to upload the published journal article to your Website and open it up to the public. As far as i know, you're only allowed to pass it on a personal, per-request basis. This explicitly refers to the final peer reviewed article and not to the manuscript, which can make a great difference.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#47

Post by Tepix »

goatkarma wrote: post #41

One thing that is often overlooked is method that Scihub uses to obtain articles, and the impact that method has on the very researchers who use it. Phishing scams are used to obtain the credentials of university accounts which are then used via a proxy on Scihub to obtain the requested article (it's quite clever..they seem to often silently proxy institution's Ezproxy with the phished credentials) . The same credent…

Proof required. You may work for Elsevier and just be spreading FUD.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#48

Post by qwerty456127 »

I personally adore Sci-Hub and Libgen but that's because such is my personal alignment - I believe no such concept as "intellectual property" should exist and right (which, from my point of view, is unlimited sharing of what is usually copyrighted in this case) is more important than legal.

To support my stance I can cite the German phenomenon (many attribute it's 19th century industrial growth to unconstrained knowledge distribution made possible by lack of copyright laws) and the biblical "miracle of the five loaves and two fishes" where Jesus replicated five loaves and two fishes to feed a lot of people (today copyright advocates would say replicating bread this way meant "stealing" from the baker). And the fact I then buy a legal paper copy whenever I read a pirated ebook if I liked it while the lack of a pirated copy availability would never cause me to buy a legal copy (countrary to the concept of lost profit copyright advocates use).

At the same time I was initially surprised about the fact the scientific society is openly speaking pro-SciHub and pro-LibGen: most of the same people would generally say piracy is bad both because it's "stealing" from the copyright holders and because it means breaking a law. They would condemn using cracked apps, sharing movies and ignoring licenses, I have met quite a number of professors who would surely expel me from the university if I had scanned an expensive textbook and shared it with other students, yet they magically support SciHub. I find this phenomenon curious.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#49

Post by Tepix »

fbn79 wrote: post #28

Why not a low cost subscription app like Spotify that rewards the publishers (and I hope, by conseguence Authors and Reviewers)? This would be appetible to more general academy world (even low grade schools) and even small business that do research and development. And could create a more virtuose author/reviewers gratification.

Spotify uses DRM. Scientific papers should not be encumbered by DRM.

Re: The Unstoppable Rise of Sci-Hub (2019)

#50

Post by ovi256 »

goatkarma wrote: post #41

One thing that is often overlooked is method that Scihub uses to obtain articles, and the impact that method has on the very researchers who use it. Phishing scams are used to obtain the credentials of university accounts which are then used via a proxy on Scihub to obtain the requested article (it's quite clever..they seem to often silently proxy institution's Ezproxy with the phished credentials) . The same credent…

Do you have any evidence for this ? Because otherwise it's just a piece of FUD to poison public perception of scihub.

Especially the gratuitously cruel "credentials given to Scihub are often not just used by Scihub, and are then used for further phishing or hacking by other third parties".

Post reply on HN