Slashdot Mirror
Sci-Hub, a Site With Open and Pirated Scientific Papers
lpress writes: Sci-Hub is a Russian site that seeks to remove barriers to science by providing access to pirated copies of scientific papers. It was established in 2011 by Russian neuroscientist Alexandra Elbakyan, who could not afford papers she needed for her research and it now claims to have links to 48 million pirated and open papers. I tried it out and found some papers and not others, but it provides an alternative for researchers who cannot afford access to paid journals. After visiting this site, one cannot help thinking of the case of Aaron Swartz, who committed suicide as a result of prosecution for his attempt to free scientific literature.
Proof that the new management/editors are no different from what we used to have here.
They literally published a summary with a broken link.
Takes just seconds to check links.
This is the kind of person/entity that has the balls to do what is right regardless of the penalty. A true hero. Maybe a stereotype has died today.
These shenigans of paywalls are bullshit.
It is ironic that for a system that is built on being "open" (Scientific) that the modern trend is for research to be "closed."
. /sarcasm Oh noes! We can't let anyone get the original data so that you can _replicate_ and _verify_ the results for yourself.
This is anti-Science by definition.
-- /Why does /. fuck up formatting when a new paragraph starts with "/" such as this one?
Me. I read some.
It used to be easy: I was in academia and so was subscribed to basically everything. Now if I want to find out about something state of the art, it can be more difficult. Fortunately, many researchers also have a copy of their papers on a personal website.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Hey, how about instead of just assuming what I wrote, how about you do the me the courtesy of actually reading it rather then angrily giving rebuttals to things I never read.
But the paper being copied here by the Russian are post-print
That's irrelevant to your point about UP creators because the journals are not IP creators. How about you make a different point if you want rather than pretending you whether talking about IP creators. I don't really appreciate you pretending that I'm addressing a point you've so far failed to make.
You're the dishonest one here, claiming the journal publisher has no rights to profit because you should be able to access the papers for free.
I made no such claim.
Are you pissed you have spend a dollar on something valuable?
Wow not only are you ignorant, you don't even understand the depths of your ignorance. The idea of a researcher (i.e. me and all the academics I know ) charging a fee for a copy of a paper is so hilariously off base, that I don't even know where to begin. Entertainingly not only are you not someone who publishes papers, you don't even listen to someone who does, believing your own incorrect worldview instead and adding insults too because it's so far away from your understanding that apparently you cannot accept it.
You're applying this rare situation (researchers not making a profit on papers) to apply to all IP related products, which seems quite dishonest.Â
Ok you're just an idiot. Apparently you can't read so you just make shit up. I never claimed anything like what you seem to believe. The only person making unilateral claims is you. I'm merely pointing out a counterexample which demonstrates your unilateral claim is not correct in all cases.
Whatever you seem to believe, the IP creators are not hurt but infinite copying of their papers. In fact, a quite the opposite. The more the merrier when it comes to my papers.
SJW n. One who posts facts.