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

Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 237 posts

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#91

Post by finfet1 »

therobot24 wrote: post #89
finfet1 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IEEE and IEEE Explore have been actively going after professors and forcing them to take down links to their own papers. In the past, many professors hosted pdf's on their websites for their papers -- this has only stopped because IEEE has been forcing them off. Just wanted to add this for those who think professors have 'suddenly become stingy' -- no, they aren't - they were forced to.

i haven't heard this, this is interesting any links with more info?

Academia is probably keeping quiet since most of EE, CS, CE is heavily dependent on IEEE publications for reputation and career advancement and paper-reputation.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#92

Post by chris_wot »

SeanLuke wrote: post #60
raphman wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What value does the publisher's work add to the work the author generated? - organizing peer review - spell-checking and fixing layout problems - making sure that the paper stays available for a long time - handling complaints and retracting fraudulent papers - providing a single point of contact for people who would like to reuse published material (e.g., using illustrations in a textbook). Sure, many publishers d…

About fifteen years ago I was working on a venture to make an open-content journal publishing system. It didn't pan out for various reasons, but the general argument we were making this. Here are various services, and who (or what) handles them: - Peer review and top-level decision-making. This is handled entirely by the editorial board. - Typesetting. We have a free system for this: it's called LaTeX. - Copy-editing…

Thinking in terms of for-profit sounds like the wrong way to do it. You need to setup a 503c Foundation, much like the WMF.

Edit: it occurs to me that the Wikimedia Foundation is actually in the best position to do this! If you tried this before and still have the old infrastructure or business plan, have you considered approaching the WMF Board?

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#93

Post by goodplay »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #36
Fuxy wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody know a linux script/software that would 'lock' a domain down to am IP regardless what the registrar does. Maybe have even a out of band way of updating it without the registrars involvement. I guess what I'm looking for would be P2P DNS server although making sure the data is not fake would be difficult without some kind of signing. Wonder if it could use the bitcoin ledger as a kind of key server? Edit: I kn…

Sibling posts are accurate about hard coding /etc/hosts, although Sci Hub needs to move to IPFS [1]. [1] https://ipfs.io/

They should partition the papers into fields and sub-fields so that each person could easily host and mirror their field of interest.

This has the additional benefit of having the papers locally for easy indexing and searching.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#94

Post by JadeNB »

finfet1 wrote: post #80
chias wrote: post #45

I feel a little tingle of excitement seeing my own papers on Sci-Hub. I mean I get that they're trying to index all publications so it's not a "stamp or approval" or anything... but it does mean that people can actually access the knowledge I tried to throw into the world, which was kind of the whole point in doing it. I'd update my academic website to link my papers to their sci-hub URLs if I didn't think I'd catch…

IEEE and IEEE Explore have been actively going after professors and forcing them to take down links to their own papers. In the past, many professors hosted pdf's on their websites for their papers -- this has only stopped because IEEE has been forcing them off. Just wanted to add this for those who think professors have 'suddenly become stingy' -- no, they aren't - they were forced to.

Interestingly, it's gone the other way in mathematics. It used to be that lots of journals required authors to sign some sort of statement saying that they wouldn't post PDFs on their web pages. (I remember one professor who had a page essentially saying "Here's the PDFs. Sue me, Elsevier!" Unfortunately, I don't remember who it was) Eventually, I think in response to the massive, overwhelming popularity of the arXiv, which I think most mathematicians would choose over journals if forced to choose, the big publishers decided, slowly, piecemeal, and behind the times as always [0], to go with the times and stop fighting something that was going to happen anyway.

[0] With an exception for the AMS, which has always (as long as I have cared, and checked, anyway) had publication policies that are as author- and reader-friendly as one can probably expect in the real world.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#95

Post by toomuchtodo »

goodplay wrote: post #93
toomuchtodo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sibling posts are accurate about hard coding /etc/hosts, although Sci Hub needs to move to IPFS [1]. [1] https://ipfs.io/

They should partition the papers into fields and sub-fields so that each person could easily host and mirror their field of interest. This has the additional benefit of having the papers locally for easy indexing and searching.

I agree such meta data should be captured, but if the papers are converted to IPFS, it'll be easier to copy, ship, and then re-serve the data at end points.

Think of it as a [sneaker|dark]net CDN enabled by content addressable storage.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#96

Post by Lawtonfogle »

krapp wrote: post #84
Lawtonfogle wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Imagine the same site with pirated high quality scientific books. Imagine if publishers went and banned libraries, because only those who can afford books should be allowed to read them.

Libraries pay for their books, which is why they have the legal right to lend them.

A pirated book likely came from a purchased original.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#97

Post by refurb »

morgante wrote: post #68
refurb wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public resources? How do you figure? Not all research public is a public resource. Pharmaceutical companies publish, as do private foundations. Anyways, if the research was funded through public money, it gets published for free anyways.

> Anyways, if the research was funded through public money, it gets published for free anyways. It does? I'm genuinely curious. The vast majority of research is funded with public money (to some extent). Where is all this publicly-funded research published?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

Now, there is a delay (1 year?) between when it's published in a journal and when it's freely released, which I can understand bothers people, but it does eventually make it's way out to the public domain.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#98

Post by sharpneli »

dceddia wrote: post #85
ptaipale wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typesetting by publisher is not valuable at this age. Elsevier seems keen to not have third parties review the publications. And visibility, same thing. They try to prevent it. Yes, scientists should publish elsewhere; the contracts currently prevent them as Elsevier has power to stop them through their entrenched legacy position.

What prevents a group of scientists from setting up doingscience.io or whatever, and publishing their results to a big shared blog? Do the contracts stipulate that their findings can only be published in specific paid journals?

Money. Research grants are given mostly by amount of publications in well known journals. If they just start a blog then they won't get further grants and have to change careers.

The effect of Impact Factor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor) in academic grants is ridiculously high.

So in the end it's not the scientists who can make the switch. It's the people who pay the scientists.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#99

Post by oneloop »

leni536 wrote: post #28

(Thanks for daveguy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11593881 ) https://31.184.194.81/ (sci-hub.io cert) https://sci-hub.cc (same ip as above, sci-hub.io cert) https://sci-hub.ac (same ip as above, sci-hub.io cert) https://sci-hub.bz (uses a separate certificate and ip address -- 104.28.20.155) And a tor site: scihub22266oqcxt.onion

Guys, I have a question. If it's this simple to put a server into the onion, why are people not doing this with torrent trackers? I'm thinking specifically about thepiratebay.org which is still banned in the UK (at the ISP level, I believe). Then mirrors appear and then the mirrors get banned?

Why not just put it into the onion? Put it there once, problem solved.

Re: Elsevier Complaint Shuts Down Sci-Hub Domain Name

#100

Post by krapp »

Lawtonfogle wrote: post #96
krapp wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Libraries pay for their books, which is why they have the legal right to lend them.

A pirated book likely came from a purchased original.

Yes, a pirated book is often a illegal copy of a legal original. But every copy in a library is legally paid for - and they expect you to return the copies you borrow when you're done with them, because they would have to buy more otherwise. Libraries don't undermine copyright law, they depend on it for their survival.
Post reply on HN