1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
Torrenting/P2P:
Gaming:
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
You see, the problem, publishers, is that your "business" should not have been a business in the first place.
"stolen" is such an exaggerated misrepresentation...news organizations should really do better. When you steal something from someone, the owner loses access to it. She just liberated public research.
When a regular person makes something available that shouldnt be behind a paywall to begin with it's stealing. When a billionaire or company uses ai to gather data from paid sources or just straight out plagiarises it's just maximising profits.
Hey hey hey, hold on just a second. It's not called "maximizing profits", we don't do that! It's called ✨innovation✨
This is why I hate the recent trend where people are saying "If buying isn't owning, piracy isn't stealing"
"Piracy", or more accurately "copyright infringement" was never stealing. What you're doing is violating the government-granted monopoly on copying something. That's so different from stealing.
Also I have met people who have published some pretty important papers, most of them use scihub on a weekly basis, and none of them care that their papers get "stolen". And they all have some strong opinions about Elsevier.
These articles were stolen, by the paywall operators. Elbakyan rescued them from the thieves. 🎉
While it's true that publishers do something of value, the amount they charge is absurd.
What makes it even worse is that so many of the people involved are donating their labour. It reminds me of college sports in the US. The actual people doing the work, the athletes, are forced to do it for free. Meanwhile, a few select groups: coaches, TV networks, etc. are making huge amounts of money.
Yeah, I have no problem with people being compensated for their work.
The problem is that the discussion usually ends at "compensation" and never includes "how much?" Useful idiots believe that whatever price is charged is always fair and necessary, which is sad.
In a system literally built around the amount of money we have, we sure do like to believe that magnitude doesn't matter.
“People often say to me, ‘You don’t pay the authors. You don’t pay the reviewers. You hardly print anymore. The Web is free. Why do you charge?’” said H. Frederick Dylla, the former director of the American Institute of Physics and board member of the Association of American Publishers. “It sounds like a compelling argument. But it actually isn’t.”
Albert Greco, a publishing expert at Fordham University who is working on a book about scholarly publishing, said those making that argument are forgetting everything they learned or should have learned in economics class.
“There are costs,” he said. “Does The Washington Post have a paywall?”
Yes.
“So is it fair then if some high-school student wants to really follow the Supreme Court and doesn’t have the money to pay?” Greco said. “Life is a bitter mystery. We can’t give everything away for free. It’s not that kind of country.”
These assholes don't even have a better reason for fleecing everyone than base greed, and they don't try to hide it.
The existence of publishers for scientific literature is completely unnecessary in the modern era. They exist only to make profits to continue their existence. They don't actually provide value anymore when research institutions can just conduct peer review and then let researchers self-publish.
They create negative value (a bottleneck) by limiting who can access research for just... aggregating and hosting articles.
“It sounds like a compelling argument. But it actually isn’t.”
Well, I'm convinced!
Refuses to elaborate
Sues
‘You don’t pay the authors. You don’t pay the reviewers.
We can’t give everything away for free. It’s not that kind of country.
Instead, he just takes everything from authors and reviewers for free. Is he living in a different country?
No give, only take!!!
former director of the American Institute of Physics
arXiv, which physicists setup nearly as far back as the web, would have a word with this guy. The web was invented at CERN practically so physicists could share research documents.
Elbakyan is an immeasurably more virtuous, noble and honorable person than these Dylla and Greco worms.
Yeah lmao, that's the worst possible argument he could give I think
"Have you forgotten your economics class?" And then compared public research to a private newspaper
Like, lmao
economics class
which is absolute ideology anyhow
“Does The Washington Post have a paywall?”
wow, you're using the everyone else is doing it argument. These are fucking children
Also the Washington Post actually pays its writers.
"Stolen"...where did the originals go?
Directly to zlibrary
articles aren't - and cannot be - stolen; articles are meant to be read.
As someone in science that has used this many times, I can't emphasize enough how much this has accelerated research in the modern era. I am so grateful for her work.
Fr. After I graduated I was cut off from access to scientific literature, which is a major blow when trying to keep up in ones field.
A huge aspect of this also is that it disproportionately benefits academics and students in parts of the world where there is less institutional access to journal subscriptions. That is to say that SciHub has been a significant force for democratising knowledge and countering historic inequities.
I realize this is an older article from 2016. But it's just so good, I had to share it in case some here aren't familiar with her. Her name is Alexandra Elbakyan and she's the person behind Sci-Hub, a library website that provides free access to millions of research papers, regardless of copyright, by bypassing publishers' paywalls in various ways.
And she's my personal hero. :)
Stolen papers. Absolutely. Stolen by corporations.
I wrote one of those papers. The fuckers charged me $1000 to publish it as open access, then other journals download it and stick it on their websites and charge $60 to read it. What a joke!
Ignorant person checking in with probably a dumb and oversimplified question, but what prevents you and other science researchers from posting your writing independently? Why must you submit to these corpo controlled publications?
If you don't get published, you don't get cited. If you don't get cited, it appears your work isn't important.
That said, every researcher I've emailed requesting a copy of a paper gladly supplied it, and many put them up on their uni sites.
Public knowledge can't be stolen IMHO
"He stole my idea!"
Filling in Aaron Swartz footsteps
Hopefully not all the way...
Is that the Anna from Anna's archive?
/s
Alexandra is the hero students (and scientists) all over the world need! And I'm so glad that my former profs acknowledged and recommended Sci-Hub to us. So many people wouldn't be able to graduate without debt (or "even more debt" for the Americans) otherwise.
Still insane to me that one woman literally saves the world of science from all this corruption
Mad respect.
Following in Aaron Swartz's footsteps.
Hopefully she doesn't get treated the way he did.