"Police are warning students and universities not to access Sci-Hub, an "illegal website" that allows users to download scientific research papers normally locked behind expensive subscriptions."
Very bad indeed. That name again: Sci-Hub. Remember it so you can avoid it. Ahem.
I'm sharing the site everywhere so people know to stay away from it.
Thank you for warning us!
@fribbledom Download? Maybe no, but at the same time, there can be different degrees of seamlessness between your own knowledge and the combined knowledge of humanity.
Right now this is represented by the ability to go to #wikipedia at any time, limited only by your understanding of the knowledge map, of basic principles common to all science, and reading speed.
In the future, the seam will only be thinner.
If an author/creator/owner of a piece of #work says their work has a price / is not free / can (only) be accessed with payment... whether it's physical or digital goods... and we go around their backs and take their work without compensating them...
Well, there's a word for that. 🤨
What one does is their choice. You do what you do. But *let's not teach/encourage others* to go down that path. That is much worse than doing the wrong yourself.
@evelynyap @fribbledom The problem I see in academic publishing is (correct me if I'm wrong) the authors not getting any money even though the public has to pay for access.
This is why I personally don't see that mich of a moral problem with pirating papers etc.
But I can see where you're coming from and I agree that if a authors / creators income is directly harmed from piracy of their work it is immoral to just take it.
What do you think?
Instead, I think it's best to contact them directly* and ask* nicely. Or offer to pay them directly. I bet it would please them.
As far as i know, studies are either funded by authors/researchers themselves (rare) or by an entity/institution (common). It's reasonable to think that whoever funded it would own* the work and may want to get some of their investment back. 🤷♀️
All my papers so far have been funded either by EU or the government or a funding entity that collects money from charity and fundraising events. On top of the research cost I have had to pay thousands of euros to publish them. If you ask me, I’ve already paid enough to the vultures (ai.e journal) which almost always have embargo periods. If anyone access my articles via sci-hub, I morally support them.
Sometimes due to certain policies and regulations, you are forced to publish in a specific journal which is not open access. That has happened to me too.
The journals does not have high costs. Their only costs are editorial team salaries and website maintenance. Everything else is done for them for free by abusing the academic system, including but not limited to writing the article, producing the figures, typesetting, peer review, and data storage and DOI.
I think police should also warn students and universities not to access libgen, an "illegal website" that allows users to download all kinds of academic books normally priced exceptionally high."
@hans Takes away nothing from the researcher but it might make it so the publisher's CEO won't be able to buy that third yacht. Very sad indeed.
@fribbledom truly horrifying crimes would be accessing library genesis, which not only has scientific information but also university-level textbooks (gasp) searchable by author, title, edition, IBSN etc. and available from several mirrors!
I just don't know how Pearson survives really, they're basically *giving* the eBooks away
Okay remind me again why are publicly funded officers working as lackeys of private, for-profit interests?
Help destroy science by making it impossible for small peer-reviewed journals to survive. Brilliant!
@hhardy01 @fribbledom Wat? Scientific journals aren't coffee shops, they either survive on stolen taxpayer money like Elsevier et al or properly spent taxpayer money like e.g. Glossa and other full OA journals, not patrons that enjoy boutique science in overpriced servings.
"Destroy science"!? Man, the audacity! If science has to depend on selling stuff to "survive", it's already destroyed.
@hhardy01 @fribbledom Nobody 'patronises' scientific journals. Nobody is 'stealing' anything. Journals do not operate on margins, or on money in general. Neither authors nor reviewers receive money for their publications from journals or the public.
If you really worry about science and scientific publication, start with informing yourself, stop spreading misinformation, learn the challenges the scientists&students face and how publishers exploit the taxpayer.
@hhardy01 @fribbledom I reread this and I sound harsher than I wish here. I generally like to assume good faith in argument and avoid interaction otherwise. There's no reason to assume ill intent on your part, so sorry for my somewhat ad hominem reply. These things are near and dear to my heart.
I want to reiterate with a level head: there's a lot that's wrong in academia, and a lot written about it. Suffice it to say many a scientist just couldn't be if not for this sort of activism.
@hhardy01 @cadadr @fribbledom The one time I helped writing a paper, it worked like this: The university payed a journal to publish it, the journal send it to other researchers in working in the same field, who did the peer review for free. After it was published the university payed for every time it was access from within their network. The journal got payed handsomely for emailing PDFs around and hosting websites. The important peer review part was done for free.
@hhardy01 @fribbledom You probably aren't familiar how science is funded, but there are no small peer-reviewer journals relying on subscriptions to survive. They are either publicly funded (often through projects, by universities etc.) or belong to big publishers that rake in enourmous profits while externalising costs to the scientific community. It makes no sense, but that is how scientific publishing works.
Also *you shouldn't* access sites like:
Library Genesis and Imperial Library of Trantor.
@fribbledom wow I hate sci-hub so much. I couldn’t have imagined using this for my school reports on vaccines, let alone scientific papers I was just interested in randomly!
What a world we live in 😂
In the modern world there is a broad consensus that science is important.
It won't die.
It will just become more free.
And in the more free ecosystem there can be healthier funding and sharing mechanisms.
@houkimenator tbh, this is a terrible idea. Science (and education) is mostly publicly funded, because that is the only sector interested in funding basic knowledge.
The problem sci-hub solves is when publicly funded science is put behind paywall by privately owned publishers. Private sector profiteering is literally the problem here.
It is not. Both civil society and corporations are interested in funding basic knowledge and educating people.
This is very prominent in countries where state underfunds education and science or outright forbids it.
@houkimenator There might be cases where corporations are necessary replacements when the state fails; that is not true in most – and especially – best cases.
Anyway, sci-hub is a literal example of the problems of corporation-funded science.
@houkimenator Curious: can you link me more information on examples of this happening? I'd like to know more.
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!