And here's how open access is actually driving science
"The Sci-hub Effect: Sci-hub downloads lead to more article citations"
This is why *no* publicly funded paper should ever be behind a paywall. I'd argue even privately funded papers should be public if the end goal is improving society. Peer review already relies on volunteers for the most part, so it's not a question of paying for them
"...we found that articles downloaded from Sci-hub were cited 1.72 times more than papers not downloaded from Sci-hub and that the number of downloads from Sci-hub was a robust predictor of future citations"
@cypnk i wonder if there is actually causality there, or just hyped articles get downloaded there more too
@valerauko I'm sure that's an effect as well. But more than anything, I think mere availability and ease of access as well
When I was still in school, getting papers was still a chore. And my school paid for subscriptions. Sci-hub makes it easy to search by title or DOI and usually the paper I need is on the first page of results. So I ended up going there first and getting the PDF
@cypnk @valerauko Efforts like scihub and libgen are huge especially for people like me with less priviledged backgrounds studying in lesser universities with poor libraries. I'm doing an MA in linguistics, and I don't have library access to >90% of what I read, and I lack means to buy even <5-10% of that (or even rent...). Simply put, Open Access and related activisim is a true, solid, huge, and invaluable enabler.
@cypnk @valerauko And not only that, but sometimes some papers or books are only available from these channels because they are too old to have ebook versions and too unpopular to be widely available in libraries. In the past year and a half, I needed probably a handful of such articles whose journals' websites went extinct or never existed and copies never widely disseminated, and no "legitimate" means to access unless you're willing to go on a little world tour just for a few pages...
@cypnk I'm kind of in the middle, I'm not against paywalls. It pays for the infrastructure to host the articles and normally its paid by a business or college. Scientists and researchers want their papers exposed to the mass of professional people in that field. I can understand why they choose the big publishers over the smaller but open/free ones.
@cypnk also I'd say they are meant for other professionals not the general public.
@jordan31 There's a good case for paywalls in certain circumstances, and I'm definitely not advocating professionals publish for free. You still need to eat
But we both know circumstances where human knowledge went forward leaps and bounds by just having the right person gaining access to the right material at the right time. This is what paywalls discourage
There's a huge difference between equality and equity. Equal access is probably impossible, but we should strive to be equitable
Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!