Live data from Hacker News

FBI subpoenaed Apple for data of Sci-Hub founder

twitter.com

81–90 of 272 posts

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

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in the UK the main sci-hub domains are blocked at the ISP level. We're a very censorous country.

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

And I can't reply to myself above, but after starting ExpressVPN I can access the sites fine.

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

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in the UK the main sci-hub domains are blocked at the ISP level. We're a very censorous country.

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

Just changing your dns is fine.

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

#83
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?

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 it's extraordinarily unfair to think of this as extortion. The professors have always been free to publish wherever they like and they each chose the copyrighted journals. Do we say that a fancy hotel "extorted" the fees from the guests who chose to book a room?

Some young researchers often claim that they feel pressured by the system to choose the so-called prestige journals. This pressure is coming from older researchers who are making a decision from their experience. They don't need to reward journal writers but they do. Indeed, the open access professors could announce that they will penalize the tenure reviews for those who publish in copyrighted journals. But they don't, and I think it's because they realize that, for all of the costs, the copyrighted journals do a good job curating the information.

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

#84
post #35
post #29

“What Happens on your iPhone, Stays on your iPhone” - they said https://i.imgur.com/Dfk34yM.jpg

it does. Unless you tell your iPhone to send everything you have to Amazon, or Dropbox, or iCloud, or Google, or Facebook, or Backblaze, or [insert cloud service subject to Chinese, EU, or US law here].

I think it's important to note that for Backblaze personal backup you can set your own private keys for end to end encryption[0].

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/mncrsn/-/gu0dvf7...

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

#85
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look what happened to Kim Dotcom over US copyright at the behest of the corporate content owners: swat team, extradition hearings, the works. The US penalties are greater than murder.

Yeah, it's insanity. That guy somehow got worse treatment than violent drug traffickers.

As far as I can tell he didn’t do anything illegal either? Same business model as YouTube, which didn’t have any SWAT teams on it.

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

#86
post #30
post #14

Sounds like she's been in hiding since 2015[0]: > Following a 2015 lawsuit brought in the US by the publisher Elsevier, Elbakyan remains in hiding due to the risk of extradition; Elsevier was granted an injunction against her and $15 million in damages. Elbakyan and Sci-Hub were again involved in a US lawsuit in 2017, this time with the American Chemical Society. ACS sued the site for copyright and trademark violatio…

She lives in Russia and attends some local events. There is no reason to hide if you don’t travel outside of Russia.

In Kazakhstan

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

#87
post #49

Science Publisher Elsevier's reported profit margin is 38%, compared to Apple's 21% – there's lot of cash at stake for them and a big warchest to defend it For anyone looking to understand the background on the science publishing industry, how it ended up this way and why they will fight Sci-Hub so aggressively, I found this discussion really informative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PriwCi6SzLo&t=8s&ab_channel=..…

I'm wondering why it's only 38%. They charge a lot and mostly work with volunteers. It should not cost 62% of what they charge to run a website to host some pdfs.

They invest in making clinic decision support software to make research accessible to doctors, etc (it’s practically also making decisions for them at times).

Source - have attended an Elsevier CDSS Sales presentation for HCPs

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

#88
post #49

Science Publisher Elsevier's reported profit margin is 38%, compared to Apple's 21% – there's lot of cash at stake for them and a big warchest to defend it For anyone looking to understand the background on the science publishing industry, how it ended up this way and why they will fight Sci-Hub so aggressively, I found this discussion really informative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PriwCi6SzLo&t=8s&ab_channel=..…

I'm wondering why it's only 38%. They charge a lot and mostly work with volunteers. It should not cost 62% of what they charge to run a website to host some pdfs.

The rest might be laundered somehow.

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

#90
post #42
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?

You are completely right that the current system is nonsense. It only exists, because back in the day there was no internet. Scientists needed publishers that would print and distribute scientific results. But publishers might deny publication in their journals if they thought the science is not good enough. Thereby the publishers established a reputation system. For example, it is really hard to get a scientific pap…

And this is why it's hard for newcomers to switch to open access journals. Because they cannot easily afford not to have well known journals in their publication list when applying for positions. Because the people in charge probably don't fully understand the applicant's research, but they think they get a good sense of quality by the names of the journals
Post reply on HN